knowledge transfer across countries and cultures an ... · knowledge transfer across countries and...

Knowledge Transfer Across Countries and Cultures

An International Theory-Building Case Study

Tracy Stanley

A report of a research project in partial requirement for the

Master of Business (Research)

in the Brisbane Graduate School of Business,

Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.

June 2003

The work contained in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree or

diploma at any other higher educational institution. To the best of my knowledge and

belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person

except where due reference is made.

This work has been set in 12 point Times Roman font and conforms with the requirements

of the Style Manual published by the Department of Finance and Administration (1994),

and the requirements of the Queensland University of Technology. The Style Manual

specifies that spelling contained within quotations are to conform with the original

document quoted. Some spelling inconsistencies in the report result in consequence of

this.

Signed: Date:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis has been a strong testament to the power of knowledge transfer through social

interaction. Throughout my journey, I have never ceased to be amazed by the quality of

the knowledge development process when two or more people are brought together in a

mutually supportive environment, to explore concepts and ideas.

I feel tremendously privileged to have had access to three great mentors and supervisors in

Dr Paul Davidson, Dr Brian Delahaye and Dr Kate Andrews. Each brought with them on

my journey, a different coloured lens through which we could examine together, the

intricacies of knowledge transfer. As light travels further, becomes more colourful and

takes on different shapes as it is reflected through a prism, so also is knowledge

transformed and energized when it passes through different lens of analysis.

These findings are the result of this powerful dynamic.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS iv

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Term Meaning

Central Organisation Amadeus Central - based in Nice, Madrid and Munich, is responsible for the development, support and deployment of products to the NMCs for distribution in their markets

Central team The Product Market Managers (PMMs) and Market Managers (MMs) who provide support directly to the NMCs

Knowledge Manager Developed the Knowledge Management program at Amadeus. Role was then responsible for driving the implementation of Best practice transfer in sales and marketing throughout the markets of EMEA LA The Knowledge Manager is the researcher for this study

National Marketing Company or Distribution Company or NMC

The local distributor of Amadeus products in that country or market.

Market Can be one or several countries in which Amadeus has actual or potential commercial relationships.

OPERA Amadeus internal intranet.

Best Practices Exchange Is the area on the Amadeus intranet dedicated to providing best practice case studies and summaries in sales and marketing

EMEA LA Europe Middle East Africa and Latin America

MEA Middle East & Africa

LA Latin America

CESE Central Eastern and Southern Europe

WE Western Europe

GMs General Managers

KEY WORDS v

KEY WORDS

Knowledge management; organisational learning; knowledge transfer; knowledge

measurement; barriers to knowledge transfer; tacit knowledge; culture; indicators of

knowledge transfer; knowledge filters

ABSTRACT vi

ABSTRACT

While the importance of knowledge creation and management has been widely recognised

as vital to an organisation’s ongoing competitiveness and success since the 1990s, there

has been little systematic study of knowledge creation and transfer processes in

organisations. Much of what has been reported in the literature is anecdotal in nature.

Particularly lacking is research within an international context, exploring issues related to

the transfer of knowledge across countries and culture. It is proposed that there is a need

for theory building research in the area of knowledge transfer.

Given the complex and social nature of knowledge, a qualitative approach to undertaking

this research was adopted. The study is an inductive, theory-building case study in relation

to a multinational company.

In summary, this study evaluated the effectiveness of a best practice knowledge

management program in achieving knowledge transfer in sales and marketing practices

throughout the markets of Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America. It considered

the methods by which knowledge was transferred and their relative effectiveness, and

those factors which may have mediated or limited the knowledge transfer processes.

The research was undertaken by the company’s Knowledge Manager who had created the

best-practice knowledge transfer program. The implications of this situation on the study’s

validity and reliability are discussed, and were taken into account in the design of the

questionnaire and in the analysis of all findings.

The case study site was a European-based, global travel technology company. The

principal data-gathering method was a structured interview conducted by telephone with

senior staff from within 28 European and Latin American markets. In total, 31 interviews

ABSTRACT vii

were undertaken. This broad-ranging interview method gathered information and feedback

on the processes used for identifying and distributing best practices in sales and

marketing. The interview data were supplemented by feedback questionnaires from best

practice forums, intranet usage statistics, observations from best practice forums and from

interviews with staff in the central organisation.

While there was evidence that knowledge transfer had occurred, the results of the study

highlighted the difficulties in effectively measuring the knowledge transfer process. It is

the researcher’s view that clear and visible measures of knowledge transfer are not

universal or even generic, but rather are to be discerned in a range of indicators across

actions, behaviours, attitudes and outcomes in culture-specific settings. A time based

knowledge measurement model was developed to assist in this regard.

Other major outcomes from the research included:

• The confirmation of the critical importance of face-to-face communication

mechanisms for knowledge transfer to result in knowledge uptake.

• The identification of the role of technology as an enabler of communication and

distribution of knowledge, but not as a driver for action or knowledge uptake.

• The recognition of the relationship between the broad factors impacting on knowledge

transfer such as organisational factors, external environment and individual

characteristics, in a complex and non-linear manner, suggesting that knowledge

transfer is a multi-factorial process involving interacting variables to an extent greater

than generally accepted hitherto. A tool for use within organisational settings has been

developed in this regard.

• The identification of the interplay between different individual specific characteristics

or factors such as personal experience of change, experience of working in a different

cultural context, ego/personality, and credibility of the person transmitting the practice

which influence the decision to adopt or not adopt a practice from another market.

ABSTRACT viii

• The identification of the need for cultural similarity and high levels of homogeneity, in

terms of market maturity, market size and competitive position for practices to transfer

more often between countries.

• The recognition that many factors operate to influence and shape the knowledge or

indeed to block the transfer of practices between countries, with resistance to other

practices possibly relating to an individual’s need for the application of creativity,

personal ownership and control.

Additionally, the researcher observed that much of the language within the existing

literature describing those factors which block or limit knowledge transfer is negatively

framed. The researcher believes that a change in attitude about the positive influence of

an individual’s filtering processes, together with a change in organisational language

describing resistance to knowledge transfer, would yield a positive impact on individuals’

attitudes and behaviour with regard to knowledge transfer.

Several areas for further research as a result of the study were identified and include

individual factors such as cultural characteristics, motivation, personality and adult

learning styles. Additionally, a more detailed examination and understanding of the

impact of organisational factors such as leadership and generational gaps on knowledge

transfer would be of significant value to the body of knowledge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction............................................................................................ 16

1.1 Background to the Research................................................................................... 16

1.2 Research Problems ................................................................................................. 17

1.3 Justification for the Research ................................................................................. 18

1.4 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 19

1.5 Report Outline ........................................................................................................ 20

1.6 Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 2 - Literature Review................................................................................... 22

2.1 Definitions of Knowledge ...................................................................................... 23

2.2 Organisations and Knowledge ............................................................................... 25

2.2.1 Historical Overview of Parent Theories................................................... 25

2.2.2 Overview of Knowledge Management Discipline ................................... 34

2.3 Knowledge Transfer ............................................................................................... 38

2.3.1 Components of knowledge transfer.......................................................... 39

2.3.2 Velocity and Viscosity issues in Knowledge Transfer............................. 40

2.3.3 Mechanisms for knowledge transfer ........................................................ 41

2.3.3.1 Documentation of Explicit Knowledge................................... 42

2.3.3.2 Technology.............................................................................. 43

2.3.3.3 Face-to-face mechanisms ........................................................ 44

2.3.3.4 Use of Experts ......................................................................... 45

2.3.3.5 Physical Transfer of Persons with Knowledge ....................... 45

2.3.3.6 Communities of Practice and Knowledge Networks .............. 45

2.3.4.1 Nature of the Knowledge being transferred ............................. 47

2.3.4.2 Design of Knowledge Transfer Systems .................................. 49

2.3.4.3 National Culture ....................................................................... 50

2.3.4.4 Organisational Culture ............................................................. 51

2.3.4.5 Differences in Individual Learning Styles ............................... 56

2.3.4.6 Fear of Change ......................................................................... 57

x

2.3.4.7 Push and Pull factors.................................................................57

2.3.4.8 Psycho-Social Filter and Trust issues .......................................58

2.3.4.9 Status........................................................................................60

2.3.4.10 Importance of multiple channels...............................................60

2.3.4.11 Support from senior management.............................................60

2.3.4.12 Technology ...............................................................................61

2.3.4.13 Motivation.................................................................................61

2.3.4.14 Absorptive Capacity..................................................................62

2.3.4.15 Market Conditions ....................................................................63

2.3.5 Measurement tools and processes for knowledge transfer .......................63

2.3.6 Summary ...................................................................................................69

2.4 Summary and Research Questions..........................................................................69

CHAPTER 3 - Research Strategy and Methodology.....................................................71

3.1 Factors to Consider in Research Selection..............................................................74

3.2 The Case for a Qualitative Methodology................................................................76

3.3 The Argument for a Case Study Approach.............................................................78

3.3.1 Advantages of Case Study Approach .......................................................78

3.3.2 Criticisms of Case Study Approach..........................................................80

3.3.3 Research Setting........................................................................................81

3.3.4 Survey Participant Selection .....................................................................82

3.3.5 Methodological Validity of Makeup of sample ........................................85

3.4 Data Collection Methods ........................................................................................86

3.4.1 Overview of Methods Considered ............................................................86

3.4.1.1 The Questionnaire.....................................................................86

3.4.1.2. Interviews..................................................................................87

3.4.1.3 Focus Groups ............................................................................87

3.4.1.4 Observational Studies ...............................................................87

3.4.2 Methods Rejected......................................................................................88

3.4.3 Methods Selected ......................................................................................88

3.4.4 Primary Case Study Instrument –Telephone Interview............................91

3.4.4.2 Pilot Testing of Questionnaire ..................................................95

xi

3.4.4.3 Interview Methodology ............................................................ 95

3.4.4.4 Overview of Processes ............................................................. 97

3.4.4.5 Secondary Data Sources........................................................... 98

3.4.4.6 Summary of Data Collection methods ................................... 100

3.5 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 101

3.6 Ensuring Case Study Quality ............................................................................... 103

3.6.1 Credibility of the Researcher.................................................................. 106

3.7 Ethical Issues........................................................................................................ 107

3.8 Conclusions: Summary Research Questions and Methodology........................... 108

CHAPTER 4 - Results and Discussion - Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer ...... 109

4.1 Documentation ..................................................................................................... 110

4.1.1 Most popular papers ............................................................................... 113

4.1.2 Support Requirements in Implementing Best Practices ......................... 114

4.2 Technology........................................................................................................... 115

4.2.1 Intranet Site in OPERA .......................................................................... 115

4.2.1.1 Ease of Access and Effectiveness .......................................... 116

4.2.2 Newsletter............................................................................................... 118

4.2.3 Improvements to Technology................................................................. 118

4.3 Face-to-Mechanisms ............................................................................................ 121

4.3.1 How Interviewees heard about Best Practices from Other Markets ...... 121

4.3.2 How they would like to hear about best practices in the future ............. 122

4.3.3 Best Practice Forums.............................................................................. 123

CHAPTER 5 - Results and Discussion – Factors impacting on Knowledge Transfer.......................................................................................................................................... 127

5.1 Nature of Knowledge being transferred ............................................................... 129

5.2 Design of Knowledge Transfer System ............................................................... 129

5.2.1 Design of Best Practice Forums ............................................................. 130

5.3 National Culture ................................................................................................... 131

5.4 Degree of Similarity in Competitive Conditions and Market Maturity ............... 132

5.5 Technology........................................................................................................... 133

xii

5.6 Language...............................................................................................................134

5.7 Absorptive Capacity..............................................................................................134

5.8 Motivation, Market Forces and Organisational Culture .......................................135

5.9 Experience of Change/ Fear of Change ................................................................137

5.10 Psycho-Social Filter ..............................................................................................138

CHAPTER 6 - Results and Discussion – Indicators of Knowledge Transfer............139

6.1 Findings from Best Practice Forum commitment process....................................139

6.1.1 Evidence of Positive Attitude at the Planning Stage ..............................140

6.1.2 Evidence of knowledge transfer at the Reporting stage..........................141

6.2 Evidence of Change in Attitude............................................................................146

6.3 Behaviour Change.................................................................................................147

CHAPTER 7 - Findings and Conclusions.....................................................................149

7.1 Major findings and their relationship to existing theoretical perspectives ...........151

7.1.1 How knowledge is transferred across countries and cultures .................152

7.1.2 Factors that impact on knowledge transfer .............................................154

7.1.2.1 Factors relating to the individual ............................................155

7.1.2.2 Factors relating to the organisation.........................................155

7.1.2.3 Factors related to the External Environment ..........................156

7.1.2.4 Characteristics of most prevalent adopters .............................156

7.1.2.5 Need for Ownership, Control and Personalisation .................156

7.1.3 Indicators of knowledge transfer ............................................................157

7.2 Contributions of the Study....................................................................................159

7.2.1 Means of knowledge transferred.............................................................159

7.2.2 Factors impacting on knowledge transfer ...............................................160

7.2.3 Indicators of Knowledge Transfer ..........................................................163

7.2.4 Summary of Findings & Theoretical Context.........................................165

7.3 Implications for Policy & Practice........................................................................167

7.3.1. A Tool for Assessing Managers openness to knowledge transfer ..........168

7.3.2. Strategies for Selecting and Developing Managers ................................169

7.3.3 Model of Influencing Factors and Indicators..........................................169

xiii

7.3.4 Organisational attitude, language and process development.................. 171

7.4 Methodological Contributions.............................................................................. 172

7.5 Limitations of the Study....................................................................................... 172

7.6 Future Research Opportunities............................................................................. 173

7.7 Closing Observations ........................................................................................... 174

LIST OF APPENDICES................................................................................................ 176

APPENDIX 1 .................................................................................................................. 177

APPENDIX II - LETTER TO GENERAL MANAGERS.......................................... 178

APPENDIX III – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................ 179

APPENDIX IV - LIST OF MARKETS AND PARTICIPANTS............................... 187

APPENDIX V – JUSTIFICATION OF THE QUESTION CONTEXT ................... 188

APPENDIX VI – MARKETS EXCLUDED FROM SURVEY ................................. 192

APPENDIX VII – KM PROCESS AT CASE STUDY SITE .................................... 193

APPENDIX VIII – EXAMPLE OF BEST PRACTICE SNAPSHOT ...................... 194

APPENDIX IX – INTERVIEW PLAN ........................................................................ 195

APPENDIX X – PERSONAL LOG.............................................................................. 198

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................... 199

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction xiv

TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 2.1: Organisation of the literature within Chapter Two .........................................22 Figure 2.2: Count of articles published on Knowledge Management ...............................34 Table 2.1: SECI model by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995 p. 72)........................................36 Figure 2.3: Different Mechanisms available for Knowledge Transfer ..............................42 Table 2.2: Communicating Across Technology – Meridian Resource Associates (1977) 44 Figure 2.4: Representation of factors impacting on knowledge transfer ...........................46 Figure 2.5: Obstacles to implementation of effective knowledge management programs 53 Figure 2.6: The Psycho-Social Filter (Andrews 2000, p. 214). .......................................59 Figure 2.7: Expectancy Theory..........................................................................................62 Table 2.3: Classes of indicators ........................................................................................67 Figure 3.1: Overview of Research Study Methodological Selection.................................71 Figure 3.2: Overview of Factors Influencing Research Methodology Selection...............72 Table 3.1: Criteria for survey participant selection with justification ..............................83 Table 3.2: List of details of survey respondents by region ...............................................84 Figure 3.3: Overview of process for developing survey instrument...................................91 Table 3.4: Summary of interview question areas by research question............................93 Table 3.5: Key Steps in design, communication and implementation of case study........97 Figure 3.4: Overview of data collection methods............................................................101 Table 3.5: Advantages and disadvantages of tape recording the interview.....................102 Table 3.6: Comparison of Validity and Reliability Criteria ............................................104 Figure 4.1: Knowledge transfer mechanisms at case study site.......................................110 Table 4.1: Summary of respondents’ feedback on best practice documentation.............111 Table 4.2: Summary of Most Popular Best Practice Papers ............................................113 Table 4.3: Additional support requirements for implementation by market ..................114 Table 4.4: Summary of responses: easy of access and effectiveness of intranet.............116 Table 4.5: Summary of Access frequency for Intranet ....................................................117 Table 4.6: Summary of those markets receiving and reading monthly newsletter.........118 Table 4.7: Summary of Recommendations relating to use of technology.......................119 Table 4.8: Summary of responses to questions re new technological services ...............120 Table 4.9: How they heard about Best Practices .............................................................121 Table 4.10: How they would like to hear about Best Practices in the future...................122 Table 4.11: How forums should be run in the future......................................................123 Table 4.12: Which markets would like to share with which markets..............................125 Figure 5.1: Factors Impacting on Knowledge Transfer ...................................................127 Table 5.1: Summary of questions used to gather information for Question 2................128 Table 5.2: Multi-channel knowledge management process at study site.........................129 Table 5.3: Characteristics of each geographic region......................................................133 Table 5.4: Perceived level of motivation of survey respondents .....................................136 Table 6.1: Examples of commitments made by two markets in MEA ............................140 Table 6.2: Extract of findings re transfer of practices between markets .........................141 Table 6.3: How each market first heard about the Best Practice .....................................143 Table 6.4: Those markets implementing best practices from other markets ...................144 Table 6.5: Examples of outcomes from transfer of best practices...................................144 Figure 6.1: Stages of Knowledge Transfer Process .........................................................146

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction xv

Figure 7.1: Stages of Knowledge Transfer Process ........................................................ 158 Figure 7.2: Model of observable and non observable knowledge................................... 163 Table 7.1: Indicators and measures of knowledge transfer over time............................. 165 Table 7.2: Summary of major contributions ................................................................... 166 Table 7.3: Tool to assist measure the likelihood a manager will consider a practice ..... 168 Figure 7.3: Model of Knowledge Transfer Across Countries and Cultures.................... 170 Table 7.4: Comparison of language used for knowledge transfer................................... 171

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction 1

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

“Many organisations can articulate the How in knowledge transfer – but not the Why

…..There has been very little systematic study of knowledge transfer in organisations”

(Dixon 2000, p. 172)

1.1 Background to the Research

While the importance of knowledge to the development of society has been recognised by

writers and philosophers since the ancient Greek period (Gamble 2001; Nonaka &

Takeuchi 1995), it has been only in the last ten years that its importance to organisational

life and organisational effectiveness has received detailed attention (Prusak 1998; Wah

1999).

The development of knowledge management as a distinct area has been historically

influenced by research undertaken across a broad range of disciplines. These disciplines

include sociology, psychology, and philosophy. Since the early 1990s, research in the

knowledge management area has been extended through contiguous areas including

change management, leadership development, systems theory, organisation theory,

organisational development, organisational learning and artificial intelligence. Of the

many parent disciplines or related fields, organisational learning is arguably the closest

‘cousin’ to knowledge management ‘...with knowledge management and organisational

learning being considered two sides of the one coin’ (Hackett 2000, p. 16).

Over the last ten years there has been significant interest in knowledge as an

organisational and commercial variable (Blackler 1995; Brown & Duguid 1998; 1993;

Edvinsson & Malone 1997; Spender & Grant 1996; Sveiby 1997), with the requirement to

better understand knowledge processes in organisations being specifically identified as


important (Dixon 2000; Leonard 1998; Miles, Miles, Perrone & Edvinsson 1998; Teece

1998). However, while its value to organisational success has been well documented,

there has been little systematic study of how knowledge is enabled and transferred in

organisations (Deviney, Soo & Midgley 2001; Dixon 2000; von Krogh, Ichijo & Nonaka

2000). Because of this, much of the knowledge management theory is based on limited

and often anecdotal evidence. This is particularly the case for knowledge transfer within

and between different cultural contexts.

In the discussion that follows, Section 1.2 introduces and justifies the research problem,

with the research questions directing the study presented in Section 1.3. Section 1.4

describes and justifies the methodology adopted. Section 1.5 outlines the contents of the

report, describes the limitations of the research and lists the key assumptions. Section 1.6

concludes the chapter.

1.2 Research Problems

As a term, ‘Knowledge Management’ is not easy to define, nor as an object or entity, is

easy to value or measure (Romhardt 1998). In fact, the term ‘knowledge management’ is

itself an oxymoron as knowledge is not really capable of being managed in the traditional

sense of an organisational resource (Davidson & Griffin 2003).

Organisations that attempt to manage knowledge as if it were any other organisational

asset, object or tangible good, typically meet with limited success. In the words of Karl-

Erik Sveiby, one of the founding fathers of knowledge management, this is because

‘knowledge is a human faculty…’(cited in Wah 1999, p. 10). As such, it is both

conceptually and fundamentally different from other organisational ‘resources’ such as

financial and physical resources. This point is supported by von Krogh, Roos and Kleine

(1998) who comment that ‘knowledge management is so challenging because we need to

discard our very ingrained notions of control, structure and goal rationality’. Prusak (cited

in Cortada & Woods, 1999, p. 3) comments that knowledge management as an overt


activity performed within firms is still considered to be a ‘black box’, with people using

many different determinations for knowledge management. Thus the nature of the

subject topic is not universally understood, although its value has been widely reported.

Additionally, there are clear challenges to be faced in analysing ‘knowledge’ as an object

itself.

Having set the context for the research project, it is useful to outline the broad objective of

the study. This objective is to conduct a detailed examination of knowledge transfer

processes in an international organisational setting. As a consequence, the study should

validate and extend existing knowledge-transfer theory, frameworks and models.

1.3 Justification for the Research

A knowledge management program should support the achievement of an organisation’s

strategic objectives (Earl 1997; Hackett 2000; Stewart 2002; Sveiby 1997). It should also

provide the following benefits:

• facilitate quicker knowledge creation and leveraging;

• encourage innovation;

• safeguard against knowledge loss when staff leave;

• help to build closer relationships with customers;

• enhance overall competitiveness,

• improve productivity and efficiency; and

• reduce the cost of reinvention (Hackett 2000)

For these reasons, it is an extremely valuable area for research attention. As has been

stated earlier, the study of knowledge creation, knowledge development, knowledge

transfer, knowledge measurement and knowledge management is a relatively new area of

organisational and research interest. While anecdotes abound with regard to various


knowledge management initiatives undertaken by different organisations, there is a lack of

systematic study on knowledge transfer in organisations (Dixon 2000, p. 172; von Krogh,

Ichijo & Nonaka 2000). This is particularly the case for knowledge transfer within

different cultural contexts.

The existing literature does however provide a basis for developing research questions to

guide further study in this area. Based on detailed analysis and interpretation of the

existing literature, and identification of gaps in the literature, three research questions have

been developed to anchor the present study. These are:

1. By what means is knowledge transferred across countries and cultures?

2. What factors impact on knowledge transfer across countries and cultures?

3. What are the indicators of knowledge transfer across countries and cultures?

1.4 Methodology

The objective of this study is to test existing theory as well as to develop new theory in the

domain of knowledge transfer. Given the complex and social nature of knowledge, a

largely qualitative approach to undertaking this research was adopted.

The company’s Knowledge Manager who had created the program, undertook the

research. The implications of this involvement for the validity and reliability are taken into

account in the design of the questionnaire and in the analysis of all findings.

The case study site used was a European-based, global, travel technology company. The

principal data-gathering tool was a structured interview conducted by telephone with

senior staff from within twenty-eight European and Latin American markets. This broad-

ranging interview gathered information and feedback on the processes used for identifying

and distributing best practices in sales and marketing. The interview data were also


supplemented by intranet usage statistics, best practice commitment reports, observations

from best practice forums and from interviews with staff in the central organisation.

As a theory-building research project, analysis and interpretation was a data-driven

process with new themes and insights emerging directly from the data itself. The study’s

data set allowed complexities in the relationships between the factors impacting on

knowledge transfer to be identified. In the report, links between the conclusions drawn in

the study and the data on which they are based is explicitly maintained by reporting the

respondents’ own words.

The third chapter of this report, details the methodology used in the study. The choice of

research method used has also been justified in this section, where the use of a structured

interview as a primary research instrument has been compared and contrasted with other

qualitative research methods.

This research was undertaken as a part of a wider review of the effectiveness of the

organisations knowledge management program.

1.5 Report Outline

The following section overviews the structure of the research project by describing the

seven chapters of the report.

Chapter One provides the background for the study, and overviews the contribution of

each chapter.

Chapter Two reviews the literature on knowledge management, citing the influences of

other disciplines and contiguous areas of research. Specific attention is directed to

reviewing existing models and theories with regard to knowledge transfer. The objective


of this chapter is to create a theoretical foundation upon which the research will be based.

Based on this analysis, three research questions are developed to guide the study.

Chapter Three provides the methodological justification for the research approach to be

adopted. The study’s research methodology is chosen with consideration for the study’s

three research questions and the constraints and limitations of the study site. Alternative

research methods are considered and reasons provided for non-selection. Processes to

ensure case study quality are also described, with steps taken to achieve the same

identified. Taken together, Chapters Two and Three provide the methodological

justification for the research study and its methods.

Chapters Four, Five and Six present the results of the study with regard to each research

question with limited commentary on the information presented.

Chapter Seven presents the study’s findings and conclusions, with the limitations of the

study being clearly identified. The chapter closes by identifying areas for further

exploration and analysis.

1.6 Conclusion

This chapter has laid the groundwork for the study. It has introduced and justified the

research problem and research issues. Additionally, the study’s three research questions

have been specified. The methodology was briefly described and justified, and the

contents of the report were outlined. On these foundations, the report can proceed with a

detailed description of the research project.

CHAPTER 2 - Literature Review 7

CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW

The survey of literature on knowledge management is presented in three sections within

this chapter. The first section examines definitions of knowledge. This is a critical first

step because knowledge is complex with our understanding of how knowledge is created,

transferred and leveraged developing significantly over time.

The second section looks at the evolution of our understanding of organisations, and of the

role that knowledge plays in organisations. This section provides a historical context to

the literature and draws on learning from disciplines considered to be parent theories of

knowledge management.

The third section compares and contrasts previously proposed theories, models and

experiences relating specifically to knowledge transfer in organisations.

A representation of these key literature areas, is outlined in Figure 2.1 below.

Figure 2.1: Organisation of the literature within Chapter Two

Sub Section 2.2.1 Sub Section 2.2.2

Section 2.1 Section 2.2 Section 2.3

Definitions of Knowledge

Parent disciplines of knowledge

management

Contiguous research areas

Literature on knowledge

management generally

Literature on knowledge

transfer specifically


Out of the analysis of these areas will emerge the study’s three research questions. These

questions will guide the design of the research process. Additionally, in the review of the

literature that unfolds in this chapter, clear justification will be provided for a theory-

building case study to explore knowledge transfer.

The report will now turn to the first part of the literature review, which considers the

nature of, and definitions for knowledge.

2.1 Definitions of Knowledge

The term knowledge is not easy to define although many writers have attempted to do so.

These definitions describe the characteristics, dimensions and tenets of knowledge and

reveal the complexity of factors impacting on the development and movement of

knowledge. Romhardt (1998, cited in Mertins, Heisig, and Vorbeck, 2001), found forty

separate dichotomies for the term ‘knowledge’.

Examples of a number of descriptions are provided below to illustrate this point.:

Knowledge is organised information applicable to problem solving (Woolf, 1988,

pp. 1-3).

Knowledge is the whole set of insights, experiences and procedures that are

considered correct and true…guide the thoughts, behaviour and communication of

people (van der Spek & Spijkervet, 1997, pp. 1-3).

Knowledge is information combined with experience, context, interpretation, and

reflection. It is a high value form of information that is ready to apply to decisions

and actions (Davenport, De Long & Beers, 1997, p. 87).

Knowledge encompasses the implicit and explicit restrictions placed upon objects

(entities), operations, and relationships along with general and specific heuristics

and inference procedures involved in the situation being modelled. (Sowa, 1984,

pp. 1-3).


Knowledge consists of truths and beliefs, perspectives and concepts, judgements

and expectations, methodologies and know-how (Wiig, 1993. pp. 1-3).

Knowledge is complex and socially constructed. Knowledge seeks community.

Knowledge is a living organism. Knowledge travels on language. Knowledge is

messy and slippery (Allee, 1997).

It can be seen that these definitions range from being narrow and tightly defined, to being

broad and complex with philosophical overlays. Distilling the wisdom of these

perspectives, the term knowledge is taken to refer to, for the present purpose:

“a dynamic mix of information, ideas and experience which is socially constructed

and contextually bound, and which is acquired, integrated, stored, retrieved and

potentially communicated between people”.

Before closing this analysis of definitions of knowledge, it is important to provide a

commentary on different cultural perspectives and language relating to knowledge.

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and Wheatley (2001) all believe that ‘The West’ has

previously demonstrated a strong preference for explicit knowledge over tacit knowledge,

and that this preference is related to our understanding of what knowledge is. Wheatley

(2001) asserts that current approaches to KM in the west demonstrate that we believe that

knowledge is a thing, a material substance that can be produced, measured, catalogued,

warehoused, traded and shipped. She believes that the language is littered with ‘the thing’

thinking. ‘We want to capture knowledge; to inventory it; and to push and pull it out of

people’ (Wheatley 2001, p. 29). She states that this language and the beliefs that engender

it need to be abandoned, and that we need to pay more serious attention to the human

dimension of knowledge if we are to be successful in our knowledge creation and transfer

efforts.


2.2 Organisations and Knowledge

‘Despite all the attention by leading observers of business and society, none of them

has really examined the mechanisms and processes by which knowledge is created’

(Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, p 49).

The development of knowledge management as a distinct area has been historically

influenced by research undertaken across a broad range of disciplines. These disciplines

include sociology, psychology, and philosophy. In the last five to ten years particularly,

thinking in the knowledge management area has been influenced by and extended through

contiguous areas including change management, leadership development, systems theory,

organisational theory, organisational development, organisational learning and artificial

intelligence. A brief historical overview of the influence of some of this literature is

provided below.

2.2.1 Historical Overview of Parent Theories

Organisations, at least as we know them, came into existence in the industrial era. Since

this time, much research attention has been directed towards understanding how we can

make the people in the organisation more effective. A brief overview of the key ideas

that emerged during the last 100 years, which ultimately led to the recognition of the

importance of knowledge in organisations, is provided in the following pages.

Early theorists were very systematic in their thinking about organisations with Frederick

W. Taylor believing that jobs could be scientifically analysed and employees scientifically

selected. (Davidson & Griffin 2003, p. 46) The scientific management approach was an

attempt to formalise workers’ experiences and tacit skills into objective and scientific

knowledge. However, it failed to perceive the experiences and judgements of the workers

as a source of new knowledge. (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Fayol and Weber took the

ideas of people and work management further by identifying the major management


functions of planning, organising, commanding and controlling (Davidson & Griffin

2003). Fayol’s principle of the unity of command is challenged by the development of

modern organisations with flatter and more fluid organisational structures and processes

and more dynamic information and knowledge systems.

At the beginning of the last century, Mary Parker Follett, Chester Barnard and Lyndall

Urwick developed human-relations theories that were between classical management and

behavioural approaches to the employment relationship. This genre of thinking about

organisational effectiveness emphasised the importance of social factors at work including

work teams, leadership styles and ‘informal’ systems in organisations (Nankervis 1994).

While knowledge was not a central issue in Barnard’s management concept, his views of

knowledge can be condensed as follows. Firstly, knowledge consists not only of logical,

linguistic content, but also of ‘behavioural,’ non-linguistic content. Secondly, leaders

create values, beliefs and ideas in order to maintain the soundness of knowledge systems

within the organisation as well as to manage the organisation as a cooperative system

(Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, p. 37). The work of human-relations theorists provided an

excellent groundwork for future thinking about the social context of knowledge in

organisations.

The Hawthorne experiments undertaken by Elton Mayo in 1927-32 produced surprising

but significant results, highlighting the positive impact of perceived management concern

on employee behaviour (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, p 36). This work together with that

undertaken by Maslow (1943), McGregor (1960) and Herzberg (1959) on theories of

motivation provided a context for later researchers to understand some of the conditions

under which knowledge is created and transferred in organisations.

Alfred Marshall, a forefather of today’s tradition of neo-classical economics was among

the first to state explicitly the importance of knowledge in economic affairs. According to

Marshall (1965) ‘Capital consists in a great part of knowledge and

organization…Knowledge is our most powerful engine of production…organization aids


knowledge.’ This notion was further clarified and defined through the work of Hayek and

Schumpeter, Penrose and Nelson, and Winter (Nonaka 1995, pp. 32-33).

One of the earliest references to the impact of knowledge in organisations was by Polanyi

(1966) who identified that every ‘piece’ of knowledge has two dimensions, i.e. a tacit and

explicit dimension. This differentiation has been described as the most cited and

influential in the knowledge management literature (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998, p. 246),

and is of particular relevance to the discussion on knowledge transfer in Section 2.3.

Drucker is known as being the first, in about 1960, to coin the term ‘knowledge work’ or

‘knowledge worker’ (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, p. 43). He heralded the coming of the

new organisation and of the need for businesses to convert themselves into knowledge

specialists to remain competitive (Drucker 1993, 1998). He asserted that an organisation

has to be prepared to abandon knowledge that has become obsolete and learn to create

new knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, p. 44) believe that Drucker seemed to

recognise the importance of tacit knowledge when he argued that a skill could not be

explained in words, whether written or spoken.

In the middle of the century, Simon developed a model for analysing organisations in

terms of decision-making processes. According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, p. 38),

Simon’s work on problem solving and decision making processes in organisations,

overemphasized the logical aspect of human reasoning and organisational decision making

processes. He attempted to formalise information and knowledge by disregarding the

‘non-linguistic mental process or behavioural knowledge discussed by Barnard and the

tacit knowledge’ emphasised by Polanyi (Nonaka 1995, p. 39).

The Simonian paradigm was challenged by the ‘garbage can model’ of organisations

proposed by Cohen, March and Olsen (1972) and March and Olsen (1976), who

emphasized the irrational and ambiguous nature of human problem solving and decision

making (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, p. 39). The garbage can model noted the role of


ambiguity or disorder in the organisation, but contained no valid insight on the learning

that takes place among individuals and organisations. The model did not throw light on

the importance of active knowledge creation within an organisation and neglected to

integrate organisational behaviour with systematic organisational learning. (Nonaka &

Takeuchi 1995, p. 39)

The Systems oriented approach as adopted by Burns and Stalker, Rice, and Trist and

Emery in the 1960s, saw organisations as unified systems, with specified inputs,

transformational processes, outputs and feedback loops (Nankervis 1994, p. 7). From a

knowledge management perspective, a contribution of this approach was its focus on the

interaction between people and technology.

The Contingency approaches developed by writers such as Burns, Mintzberg, Hershey and

Blanchard in the seventies contended that every organisation and every environment was

different and therefore that there was no ‘one best way’ to manage an organisation

(Davidson & Griffin 2000, p. 61). This certainly became true as the eighties heralded in a

period of rapid change with the globalisation of business, increased competition, the

advancement of technology and the growth of the internet.

In response to these circumstances, organisations needed to develop new ways of doing

business. Porter (1980) developed a framework for understanding how firms create and

sustain competitive value. While Porter’s model implicitly assumed the importance of

strategic knowledge, it did not consider the importance of values and beliefs, and

precluded the possibility of the creation of knowledge or vision from its theoretical

domain. Additionally the science of strategy pre-supposed the top-down style of

management, in which only top management were assumed to think or manipulate

existing explicit knowledge. A final limitation of this framework was that it did not pay

sufficient attention to the role of knowledge as a source of competitiveness (Nonaka &

Takeuchi 1995, p. 41).


Around this time Peters and Waterman (1995) spent time observing what makes an

‘excellent’ company. They observed that ‘excellent companies’ had made efforts to

promote the sharing of values among their employees and had created their own unique

corporate culture, which determined how the company thought and behaved. The issue of

culture type to be discussed later, was to become very central to thinking on knowledge

creation and sharing.

In the late eighties and early nineties, two related themes of interest received widespread

attention. These were the focus on understanding organisational capability as described

by Prahalad and Hamel (1990), and Stalk, Evans and Schulman (1992), and on seeing

knowledge as strategy (Earl 1997; Stewart 2002; Sveiby 1997). The latter area came to

prominence as a result of the reporting of the success of two organisations called Skandia

and Shorko (Earl, 1997 pp. 1 – 15). These organisations had consciously leveraged their

organisational knowledge to achieve competitive advantage. They did this by basing their

competitive strategies on understanding their operations in chosen territories better than

their rivals. Earl (1997, p. 9) later asserted that for a business to build a strategic

capability in knowledge, it must have four components including knowledge systems,

networks, knowledge workers and learning organisations.

Other emerging areas of interest and research in the decade that followed included:

working across cultures (Evans, Hau & Sculli 1989; Ferraro 1990; Hampden-Turner 1993;

Harris & Moran 1990; Hofstede 1997; Trompenaars 1993); understanding organisational

culture (Deal & Kennedy 1982; Schein 1985); and developing leadership skills in an

international context. (Bass 1997; Karpin 1995; Nadler & Tushman 1990; Vroom & Jago

1988).

The research on organisational culture was able to shed light on organisations as

epistemological systems (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). It emphasised the importance of

human factors such as values, meanings, commitments, symbols and beliefs and paved the

way for research on the more tacit aspects of knowledge.


Not surprisingly, the challenge of how to manage change became a focus for

organisational attention in the eighties. This new movement, which often described the

need for significant change in organisations in terms of a ‘paradigm shift’, drew

extensively on research from across many organisational and management research

domains. Key authors and influencers at this time included Dunphy (1981), Handy

(1996), Kotter (1995) and Peters (1988). At an individual level, the impact of change and

transition was discussed by prominent thinker/psychologist William Bridges (1995).

The 1990s also saw the influence of the total quality movement and business process

reengineering. Prusak (cited in Cortada & Woods 1999) believes that the quality

movement had a positive influence on the development of knowledge management as it

brought focused attention to internal customers, overt processes and shared transparent

goals.

With the benefit of hindsight, business process reengineering often had a negative impact

on an organisations knowledge sharing systems and culture as organisations adopted a

very systematic approach to reorganising work with little consideration for social

relationships and networks. As Schein (2000) said in an interview on the subject: ‘one of

the problems with business process re-engineering was that it was too technical a process;

there was no consideration of cultural elements, no understanding of the cultural

framework of what was to be reengineered.’

With the growth of technology came a new science called artificial intelligence. This

science which included expert systems, intelligent knowledge-based systems and

knowledge engineering, really challenged/tested the limits of our understanding of

computers’ capacity to hold ‘human’ knowledge. At the same time, research was being

extensively undertaken to better understand the relationship between people and

computers (Earl 1997, p. 4).


The research area of organisational learning (OL) covers areas of significant interest to,

and relationship with, knowledge management. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, p. 45)

provide a useful definition of OL as an adaptive change process that is influenced by past

experience, focused on developing or modifying routines, and supported by organisational

memory. The OL research area itself is diverse with Easterby-Smith (1997) differentiating

six distinct disciplinary clusters. Andrews (2000) provided a succinct summary of these

disciplinary clusters. Given its relevance to the discussion on knowledge management,

this summary is attached in Appendix 1.

Within the field of organisational learning, it is important to draw specific attention to

research undertaken in the areas of Single-Loop and Double-Loop Learning (Bateson

1973; Argyris & Schon 1978), the learning organisation (Senge, 1990), emotional

intelligence (Salovey & Mayer 1990), experiential learning (Kolb, 1993), and intuition

(Vaughan, 1998). Each made a contribution to our understanding of knowledge in an

organisational setting. A synthesis of this learning is provided below.

Single-Loop and Double-Loop Learning

The understanding of how individuals learn was enhanced in the 1970s when it was

widely recognised that learning consisted of two kinds of activity. The first kind was

concerned with obtaining information/know-how to solve specific problems based upon

current premises. The second kind of learning was concerned with establishing new

premises (i.e. paradigms, schemata, mental models or perspectives) to override the

existing ones. These models were called ‘Learning I’ or ‘Learning II’ (Bateson, 1973) or

single-loop learning and double-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978). Nonaka and

Takeuchi (1995, p. 44), commented that they believed that learning and knowledge

creation resulted from the dynamic interaction of these two kinds of learning and that

organisations were generally not very good at implementing double-loop learning.


The Learning Organisation

Senge (1990) recognized that many organisations suffered from ‘learning disabilities’. To

cure this affliction and to enhance the organisations capacity to learn, he proposed the

‘learning organisation’ as a practical model. This model included five components. These

were the adoption by Managers of (1) systems thinking; (2) encouragement of personal

mastery of their own lives; (3) the bringing of prevailing mental models to the surface and

challenging them; (4) building a shared vision; and (5) facilitating team building (Nonaka

& Takeuchi, 1995, pp.44-45). Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) believed that Senge’s model

built a new synthesis between scientific and humanistic approaches to management and

that his emphasis on systems thinking may hold a key to linking reason and intuition.

However (Weick 1991, p. 122) criticised Senge’s view that knowledge development alone

constituted learning.

Emotional Intelligence

Salovey and Mayer first proposed their theory of emotional intelligence (EI) in 1990.

Emotional intelligence at the most general level refers to the abilities to recognise and

regulate emotions in ourselves and in others. It is a theory derived from a number of

psychological fields including developmental, educational, clinical and counselling,

social, industrial and organisational psychology (Goleman, 1998). Over the intervening

decade, theorists have generated several distinctive EI models including Reuven Bar-on

(2000) placing EI in the context of personality theory, and Goleman (1998) formulating EI

in terms of performance. Goleman’s (1998) definition suggests four major EI domains:

Self-Awareness, Self Management, Social Awareness and Relationship Management.

These theories provide a useful perspective for examining how individual and social

dynamics impact on knowledge transfer in the workplace, with the capacity for developing

effective relationships, clearly being an influential factor impacting on knowledge transfer

processes.


Experiential learning

The importance of experience to learning first received attention in the early 1980s when

Freire (cited in Kelly, 2000) and others stressed that the heart of all learning lies in the

way we process information, in particular our critical reflection of experience. They

spoke of learning as a cycle, that begins with experience, continues with reflection and

later leads to action, which itself becomes a concrete experience for reflection. Kolb

further refined the concept of reflection by dividing it into two separate learning activities,

perceiving and processing (Algonquin 1996). The work of Kolb and other learning

theorists makes a valuable contribution to our understanding of individual knowledge

assimilation and creation processes.

Intuition

The link between intuition and knowing is another area of research relevant for the present

study. Vaughan (cited in Mishlove, 1988, p. 1) stated that ‘intuition is a way of knowing’

and that even though intuition is instinctive, it can be learnt. She believes that while it

transcends reason, it is not in opposition to reason. Intuition therefore may reasonably be

seen to be a potential source of influence on the way individuals perceive and process

information and knowledge (Mishlove, 1988. pp 1-2).

Concluding Remarks

This section has provided an overview of the influence of many different thinkers and

theorists on the knowledge management domain. From this review it is clear that

particularly since the 1990s, organisations have continued to search for ‘that thing’ that

would provide them with the ongoing competitive advantage that they needed to survive.

Increasingly more and more voices were saying that it was the knowledge inside the

organisation that would make the difference. This knowledge resided in many places

including internal documents, business processes and people’s heads. The knowledge in

people’s heads was affected by the organisations processes, systems and culture, and by

individual and organisational learning methods and preferences. The challenge for

organisations’ was therefore how to identify or create the knowledge, access it, and then to


distribute it effectively throughout the organisation. This discipline came to be known as

Knowledge Management. An overview of this domain is provided in Section 2.2.2.

2.2.2 Overview of Knowledge Management Discipline

Whereas the previous sub-section provided an historical overview of parent and

contiguous theories of knowledge management, this subsection examines theories and

models directly concerned with knowledge management. Most of these models have

emerged since the 1990s, with an exponential growth of interest in the area since 1998.

This point is evident in the ever-increasing number of articles published each year. A

count of articles published on ABI inform in the knowledge management area is provided

below in Figure 2.2 to illustrate this point.

Figure 2.2: Count of articles published on Knowledge Management

0100200300400500600700

No of acticles

93 94 95 96 97 98 99 0 1 2

Year starting at 1993

Knowledge Management Articles published on ABI info

Andrews (2000) notes that recent interest in the area is also evidenced by the existence of

special issues of major journals such as Strategic Management Journal: Special issue on

Knowledge and the Firm, Winter 1999; California Management Review Special Issue on

Knowledge Management, April 1998; and Harvard Business Review on Knowledge

Management, 1999. Additionally a large number of internet newsletters, on-line


discussion groups and websites have recently emerged to cater for the mushrooming

interest in the area.

This section will discuss four major contributions to our understanding of knowledge

management generally, before a more detailed review of existing theory related to

knowledge transfer specifically. These areas are:

• Tacit and Explicit Knowledge Dimensions;

• Knowledge Workers;

• Communities of Practice; and

• Knowledge as Strategy.

Tacit and Explicit Knowledge Dimensions

Building on the work of Polanyi (1966), Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) made one of the

most significant contributions to our understanding of knowledge in organisations through

their descriptions of the different types of knowledge. In brief, they asserted that there

were two kinds: explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge can be

expressed in words and numbers and shared in the form of data, scientific formulae,

specifications and the like. This kind of information can be readily transmitted between

individuals formally and systematically. Tacit knowledge on the other hand is highly

personal and hard to formalise, making it difficult to share with others. Subjective

insights, intuitions and hunches fall into this category of knowledge. Tacit knowledge is

deeply rooted in an individual’s actions and experience as well as in the ideals, values, or

emotions he or she embraces (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, pp. 10-11).

To access knowledge involves tapping the tacit and subjective insights of individual

employees, and that these insights have to be made available for use throughout the

company. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995, p. 36) see the company as a living organism with

a collective sense of identification, equivalent to self-knowledge in an individual. This


requires that the organisation becomes capable of sharing tacit and explicit knowledge in

four base patterns:

• Tacit to Tacit. From one individual to another as in the master-apprentice role

• Explicit to Explicit. Combining desirable pieces of explicit knowledge (Nonaka &

Takeuchi, 1995, p. 28) into a new whole i.e. creating a companies financial status

reports by collecting the pieces from each organisational unit.

• Tacit to Explicit. An individual through sharing and articulating tacit knowledge

makes it readily available to everyone

• Explicit to Tacit. As individuals better understand shared explicit knowledge, it helps

to build a cognitive bridge with their own tacit knowledge base which can spin off or

broaden a new dimension of tacit knowledge.

This model is represented in Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: SECI model by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995 p. 72).

This is a very insightful description of the interplay between tacit and explicit knowledge

and highlights how the different knowledge types react from and build on each other.

This finding is both and significant and will need to be brought forward for consideration

in the development of the research questions to guide the study.

halla

This table is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library


Knowledge Worker

The importance of the knowledge worker to the success of firms has been cited as

important since the early 1990s. Influential writers in this area include Drucker (1991),

Quinn (cited in Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995) and Wenger, Snyder and Mc Dermott (2002).

Drucker (1993) asserts that the knowledge worker is the single greatest asset in a society

based on knowledge. Quinn (cited in Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, p. 7) comments that the

capacity to manage what he calls ‘knowledge-based intellect’ is fast becoming the critical

executive skill of the era, with Wenger, Snyder and Mc Dermott (2002) stating that in the

global economy, companies are competing for people with the expertise and capabilities to

generate and implement innovative ideas. Finding and keeping the right people can make

a big difference to a company’s ability to become market leader. Understanding the

importance of knowledge workers to organisational success has emphasised the critical

nature of organisations, recruitment, development and retention strategies.

Communities of Practice

The importance of informal networks or communities of practice has also emerged in the

last decade as important for knowledge sourcing, creation, leveraging and transfer within

organisations (Brown & Duguid 1998; Davenport & Prusak 1998; Gamble & Blackwell

2001). By way of definition, Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2002, p. 4) have defined a

community of practice as a group of people informally bound together by shared expertise

and passion for a joint enterprise. They comment that while communities of practice have

been pervasive in society and organisations for a long time, it is only recently that

organisations have recognised both the central role that these communities play in

managing knowledge, and of need to be more systematic and intentional in supporting

them. O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998) found that once an organisation created the

environment and technology to support networks, they often emerged and flourished.

Knowledge as Strategy

In section 2.2.1, it was noted that Porter (1980) developed a model for how firms create

and sustain value that implicitly assumed the importance of strategic knowledge. Twenty-


two years later, Wenger, Snyder and McDermott (2002) commented that many

organisations still do not have an explicit, consolidated knowledge strategy. They assert

that the existence of knowledge driven markets make it imperative for organisations to

develop a ‘knowledge strategy’ along with a business strategy. This knowledge strategy

will detail in operational terms how the company will develop and apply the capabilities

required to execute the business strategy.

Having examined the contribution of writers covering areas including tacit and explicit

knowledge, knowledge workers, communities of practice and knowledge as strategy, the

study will now focus on specific knowledge topics, as a way of further refining the focus

for the present research. These topics include knowledge transfer mediums, influencers in

knowledge transfer and knowledge transfer measurement.

2.3 Knowledge Transfer

‘The process of identifying and transferring practices is trickier and more time-consuming

than most people imagine’ (O’Dell & Jackson Grayson, 2001, p. 1).

While section 2.2 examined theories and models relating to knowledge management

generally, section 2.3 overviews literature relating specifically to knowledge transfer, and

where available, knowledge transfer across countries and cultures. This section is

organised under the following five subject areas:

2.3.1 Components of knowledge transfer

2.3.2 Velocity and viscosity issues in knowledge transfer

2.3.3 Mechanisms for knowledge transfer

2.3.4 Factors impacting on knowledge transfer

2.3.5 Measurement tools and processes for knowledge transfer


2.3.1 Components of knowledge transfer

Existing models in the field of communications theory have influenced many of the

theories about knowledge management. Of particular importance has been work

undertaken by Shannon and Weaver (1998), who proposed a general, mathematical model

of communication examining each step within the message transfer process. Breaking the

communication process down into parts highlighted different influencers and mediators as

a message (or knowledge) moves from sender to receiver.

Mehrabian (1968) has also provided a very valuable contribution to our understanding of

the most important and effective aspect of ‘face-to-face’ communication between two

persons. Their research revealed that in any face-to-face communication, 55% of what is

communicated is done through body language and expression, 38% is communicated

through tone, and only 7% is communicated through words. This finding is very

significant when considering, the impact and effectiveness of different knowledge transfer

mediums.

Building on the work of Shannon and Weaver (1998), Davenport and Prusak (1998)

purported that knowledge transfer involves two actions: transmission (sending or

presenting knowledge to a potential recipient) and absorption by that person or group. If

knowledge has not been transferred or absorbed it has not been transferred. Merely

making knowledge available is not transfer. Access is necessary but by no means

sufficient to ensure that knowledge will be used. Even transmission and absorption

together have no useful value if the new knowledge does not lead to some change in

behaviour or the development of some new idea that leads to new behaviour.

Kanouse and Jacoby (in Davenport & Prusak, 1988, p. 102) point out that "There are good

reasons to believe that behaviour change is a much rarer event than the acquisition of

knowledge…..Resistance to change is powerful, even in the face of indisputable objective

evidence that a particular change makes sense. We are hardly wholly rational creatures”.


For the purposes of this study, the description of knowledge transfer as offered by

Davenport and Prusak (1998) will be used.

2.3.2 Velocity and Viscosity issues in Knowledge Transfer

Velocity and viscosity issues are important considerations in knowledge transfer.

Davenport and Prusak (1998) describe velocity as the speed with which information

knowledge moves through an organisation. For example:

• How quickly and widely is it disseminated? ; and

• How quickly people who need the information, become aware of it and get access to

it?

Viscosity refers to the richness or thickness of the knowledge transferred. Some critical

question related to viscosity include:

• How much of what we try to communicate is actually absorbed and used?

• To what extent does the original knowledge get pared down?

• Does what was absorbed, bear any resemblance to what we tried to transmit, and retain

any of its original value?

Viscosity is influenced by a number of factors, especially the method of transfer. For

example, knowledge transferred by means of a long apprenticeship or mentoring

relationship is likely to have a high viscosity with the receiver gaining a tremendous

amount of detailed and subtle knowledge over time. Knowledge retrieved from an on-line

database or acquired by reading an article is much thinner.

The adoption and application of new knowledge can be a slow and arduous process, and

the success rate will be profoundly influenced by the culture of the organisation


(Davenport & Prusak 1998). More on culture and its impact on the knowledge transfer

process is provided in section 2.3.4.3.

2.3.3 Mechanisms for knowledge transfer

‘A little knowledge that acts is worth infinitely more than much knowledge’ (Kahlil Gibran,

cited in Cortada & Woods 1999, p. 504).

As was mentioned in Section 2.2, knowledge can be identified as either explicit or tacit.

The most appropriate or effective knowledge communication and/or transfer mechanism

depends on the type of knowledge to be transferred. From an explicit point of view,

knowledge can be captured in documents in words and images, and can be distributed and

communicated via technology. Tacit knowledge needs human contact to be distributed.

This can happen between two people, or within a team or community.

Knowledge transfer is not easy to achieve as demonstrated by the following quote:

‘You would think that these better practices would spread like wildfire to the entire

organisation. They don’t (Senior Vice President, Xerox, cited in O’Dell & Jackson Grayson

2001, p. 1).

An overview of the mechanisms available for knowledge transfer is presented in the figure

below. As you can see from Figure 2.3, most transfer mechanisms have both tacit and

explicit knowledge dimensions. While technology is often used to transmit explicit

knowledge, as would be the case with documents and databases, recent innovations in the

area of on-line chat groups have increased the scope of technology to transmit tacit

knowledge.


Figure 2.3: Different Mechanisms available for Knowledge Transfer

2.3.3.1 Documentation of Explicit Knowledge

Knowledge that can be described through language (i.e. explicit knowledge) can be

documented. This is a common way of capturing and communicating knowledge.

Documentation is an important part of knowledge transfer process, particularly if the

organisation has many employees and is geographically dispersed.

Documenting explicit knowledge and particularly the more complex explicit knowledge,

is not an easy task. This is because collecting, codifying and documenting knowledge is

actually a high level skill. Dixon (2000, p. 117) suggests that an external person, who has

been trained in interviewing and who has a good understanding of the organisation, should

be used to document explicit knowledge with regard to best practices. She believes that

this action will help to reduce and neutralise the actual or perceived biases of those

collecting the data. She also commented that using a third party increases believability of

the resulting knowledge. These are all important considerations when examining the

quality of explicit information capture and documentation processes within an

organisational setting.

Dixon (2000) also asserts that timing is an important factor in documenting knowledge. It

is better where possible to collect and construct knowledge in real time, than when team

members rely on their memory of past events and reasoning (Dixon 2000, p. 117).

Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer

Documentation

(Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.1

Technology

(Tacit/Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.2

Face to Face

(Tacit/Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.3

Use of Experts

(Tacit/Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.4

Physical Transfer

(Tacit/Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.5

Communities & Networks

(Tacit/Explicit)

Section 2.3.3.6


When people say that tacit knowledge is difficult to transfer, they generally mean that it is

difficult to transfer by writing it down. Tacit knowledge is best transferred through human

interaction as will be discussed at various points within this study. (Dixon 2000; Nonaka

& Takeuchi 1995). Other ways of transferring tacit knowledge include using metaphors,

analogies and models (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, pp. 64-67).

2.3.3.2 Technology

Most modern organisations recognise that technology such as Lotus notes, e-mail,

databases, etc are efficient ways to distribute explicit knowledge (O’Dell & Jackson

Grayson 1998). According to Lei, Slocum and Pitts (1999) the availability of computer-

based technology components, models and inter-intra network connectivity can

significantly enhance the rapid and multi-level, multi-location sharing of knowledge,

innovation and status of progress on all fronts.

However, technology may not be the most effective transfer mechanism as reflected in the

philosophy of Davenport and Prusak (1998), that successful knowledge transfer involves

neither computers not documents but rather interactions between people. Further they believe

that knowledge management approaches that overemphasize technology are less effective

than those that focus on creating human knowledge sharing processes, changing

behaviours and organisational change.

Meridian Resources Associates Inc (1977) have developed a useful model for

understanding the limitations of technology in communicating and transferring

knowledge. Table 2.2 below applies this model in describing those elements of

communication, which are present with different knowledge transfer mechanisms. The

table should be read from the top of the left hand column down the page.

The table indicates that person-to-person communication has all the elements which

facilitate effective communication, including words, control over the format, voice tone,


immediate feedback, non-verbal actions, environmental, physical exchange and informal

exchange. At the other end of the scale, e-mail has only words.

Table 2.2: Communicating Across Technology – Meridian Resource Associates (1977)

More commentary on technology as a knowledge transfer mechanism is provided in

section 2.3.4.12

2.3.3.3 Face-to-face mechanisms

Face to face mechanisms are recognized as the most effective way for communicating tacit

knowledge by many writers including Davenport and Prusak (1998), Dixon (2000),

Hackett (2000), Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and Wenger, McDermott and Snyder

(2002). As highlighted by Davenport and Prusak (1998, p 99), sometimes knowledge

transfer can work only if people are brought together physically. Their example of the

difficulty of transferring knowledge between two groups of tunnelers, one in New Zealand

the other in Boston, highlights this point. Davenport and Prusak’s (1998) story illustrates

how difficult it can be to make tacit knowledge explicit, and to transfer it quickly and

easily. The fact that the knowledge to transfer may have been too subtle and complex to

halla



express in words, is only one of the reasons for failure. They suggest that the instinctive

resistance to change and the need for trust are at least as important. These factors are

discussed in greater detail in sections 2.3.4.6 and 2.3.4.8 respectively.

2.3.3.4 Use of Experts

Some organisations such as Lucent use designated experts to transfer knowledge in

specific topic areas (Stanley, 2001). With clearly identified experts, all employees know

whom to contact on specific topic areas. Dixon (2000) sees a limitation with this type of

transfer mechanism on the receiver. She believes that all employees have expertise in

some area, and that people are more likely to accept the knowledge of others when their

own knowledge is accepted. By identifying some people as experts over others there is a

change in the dynamic of sharing knowledge between the two parties, which has a

negative impact on knowledge transfer.

2.3.3.5 Physical Transfer of Persons with Knowledge

Similar to the findings of Davenport and Prusak (1998), O’Dell and Jackson Grayson

(1998) comment that the actual transfer of people from one location to another was and

probably still is, the most effective way of transferring knowledge and practices between

areas. With a physical transfer of a person you move the implicit or tacit knowledge as

well as the explicit.

2.3.3.6 Communities of Practice and Knowledge Networks

The power of communities of practice in transferring knowledge has already been referred

to in section 2.2.2. Understanding of the impact and power of group dynamics in

facilitating learning and knowledge transfer was first highlighted by Festinger in 1957.

Since this time, there has been extensive interest and research on the conditions that make

self-managing teams an effective vehicle for motivating individuals, transferring

knowledge and getting organisational work done (Probst, Raub & Romhardt 2000).


Given that the type of channel or medium for carrying knowledge has emerged as a

significant influencer in knowledge transfer, it will be carried forward to frame the

research questions for this study.


A review of the literature reveals that there are many factors impacting on the

effectiveness of knowledge transfer processes. The most often cited factors are illustrated

in Figure 2.4 below.

Figure 2.4: Representation of factors impacting on knowledge transfer

Organisational Factors

Design of transfer system

Section 2.3.4.2

Knowledge Itself

Individual Factors

National Culture Section 2.3.4.3

Organisational Culture

Section 2.3.4.4

Multiple Channels Section 2.3.4.10

Senior Mgt Support

Section 2.3.4.11

Technology Section 2.3.4.12

Push & Pull Factors

Section 2.3.4.7

Nature of Knowledge

Section 2.3.4.1

Learning Styles Section 2.3.4.5

Fear of Change Section 2.3.4.6

Psycho Social Filter & trust

issues Section 2.3.4.8

Status Section 2.3.4.9

Motivation Section 2.3.4.13

Absorptive Capacity

Section 2.3.4.14

External Factors

Market Conditions

Section 2.3.4.15


A brief description and analysis of each of these factors as described within the existing

literature, is provided in the following pages. The discussion is not completely linear as it

is difficult to discuss some factors in isolation from others. It is clear that many factors

have a complex interconnectivity to each other.

2.3.4.1 Nature of the Knowledge being transferred

The impact of the type of knowledge on selection of the most appropriate transfer

processes has previously been discussed in section 2.2.2 and 2.3.3. Taking this analysis

further, Dixon (2000, p. 144) has developed a model to link five types of transfer

mechanisms, based on the sort of work people are doing and where they are doing it, with

different types of knowledge based on her observations inside various organisations. A

brief description of this model follows.

Serial transfer uses the knowledge a team has learned from doing its task, that can be

transferred to the next time when the team does the task in a different setting.

Near Transfer uses the explicit knowledge that a team has gained from doing a frequent

and repeated task. The organization would then like to replicate this knowledge in other

teams that are doing very similar work

Far Transfer uses the tacit knowledge a team has gained from doing a non-routine task

that the organisation would like to make available to other teams that are doing similar

work in another part of the organisation. (When a transfer is ‘far’ the knowledge from the

source team has to be translated or considerably modified for it to be applicable to the

receiving team.)

Strategic Transfer uses the collective knowledge of the organisation needed to accomplish

a strategic task that occurs infrequently but is of critical importance to the whole

organisation.


Expert Transfer uses the technical knowledge a team needs that is beyond the scope of its

own knowledge but can be found in the special expertise of others in the organisation

Dixon (2000, p. 169) believes that the identification of the most effective transfer system

involves asking the following questions :

• Who is the intended receiver of the knowledge in terms of similarity of task and

context?

• How routine and frequent is the task?

• Is the knowledge tacit or explicit

From the answers to these questions the appropriate transfer mechanism can be selected.

The two key fundamental messages from Dixon’s model are that:

1. There are many very different ways to transfer knowledge

2. Knowledge is transferred most effectively when the transfer process ‘fits’ the

knowledge being transferred

The usefulness of this model will be reviewed in light of the research findings in Chapter

Seven.

The importance of considering work contexts in knowledge transfer was also highlighted

by Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000, p. 168). However, they were more detailed in their

analysis of the impact of work context, considering all of the physical, technical and

organisational aspects of individual and group work.

Davenport and Prusak (1998, p. 95) comment that when a company is committed to

transferring tacit knowledge, they often establish formal mentoring programs and make

passing on knowledge to young employees an explicit part of the job descriptions of

skilled senior staff. Other strategies that they have observed for transferring tacit

knowledge include knowledge fairs or market places, open forums and corporate picnics.


Davenport and Prusak (1998, p. 92) provide examples of different knowledge transfer

mechanisms used in the Japanese versus American cultures. This experience illustrates

how important it is that the transfer method suits the culture. The impact of national

culture on knowledge transfer will be discussed further in Section 2.3.4.3.

This section has considered the impact of the nature of knowledge on knowledge transfer

processes. In doing so, the discussion has digressed into other areas influencing the

knowledge transfer process including knowledge transfer systems themselves. Section

2.3.4.2 considers the design of these systems in greater detail.

2.3.4.2 Design of Knowledge Transfer Systems

The design of the transfer process system itself, impacts on the effectiveness of knowledge

transfer (Davenport & Prusak 1998; Dixon 2000). Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000)

advocate that organisations should consider a combination of people and technology in a

hybrid systems approach to knowledge transfer for it to be more effective.

Dixon (2000) provides a philosophical overlay to the discussion by asserting that if the

designers of knowledge transfer systems thought of knowledge as dynamic, they might

design conduits to enhance the flow rather than creating warehouses for its storage.

Planning would then be focussed on how to maximize the movement of knowledge across

the organisation.

Dixon (2000, p. 162) believes that splitting thinking about knowledge into technological

and cultural components is misleading. Her assertion is that both systems need to be

integrated and that knowledge must relate to an organisation’s goals. This point must be

evident to those who will use the system.

Another key point about the design of systems relates to its objectives. To be effective, a

transfer system needs to be designed for a specific purpose i.e. that meets a specific

knowledge need (Dixon 2000, p. 163). An organisation may need many knowledge


transfer systems for many unique populations. Dixon (2000) asserts that a transfer system

designed for ‘just anyone’, is less effective.

2.3.4.3 National Culture

Hofstede (1997, p. 1) defines culture to be ‘the collective programming of the mind, which

distinguishes the members of one group of people from another’. In terms of impact on

knowledge transfer, the closer people are to the culture of the knowledge being

transferred, the easier it is to share and exchange knowledge (Davenport & Prusak 1998;

Gamble & Blackwell 2001; Hofstede 1997). This view is also supported by Gagne (1997)

who asserts:

‘Learning theorists have long known that the more a learning experience resembles the

place and situation where the knowledge will be used on the job, the more effective the

transfer of learning.’

Gamble and Blackwell (2001, pp. 154-156) believe that most social groups are

ethnocentric, which is to say that they favour their own culture over others. They comment

that ‘everyone is raised in a particular cultural context and it is perfectly natural to use our

culture as the standard for perceiving, judging and evaluating experience’. As a

consequence of this situation, people tend to devalue other cultures. Gamble and

Blackwell (2001, p. 156) also commented that country culture can be very strong, with the

resulting impact that a knowledge system, however well-designed, can hardly be expected

to overcome prejudices that might have been acquired over years or even centuries.

Hofstede (1997, cited in Gamble & Blackwell, 2001, p. 156), who is widely considered to

be an expert on work related cultural differences, has identified four dichotomies that tend

to distinguish people from different countries relevant to the way in which they work.

These are:

1. Power Distance

2. Individualism/collectivism


3. Masculinity/Femininity.

4. Uncertainty Avoidance.

These factors all impact on the way an individual from one cultural setting, perceives

another, is open to new ideas and makes decisions about new ideas or knowledge.

In recognising that culture inhibits knowledge transfer, Davenport and Prusak (1998, pp.

96-97) recommend a number of ways to overcome this ‘friction’. Some of their proposed

strategies include: giving people time to build relationships and trust through face-to-face

meetings, providing education, job rotation, recruiting people who are open to new ideas,

accepting and rewarding creative errors and through encouraging non-hierarchical

approach to knowledge.

National culture is clearly a significant and complex issue in knowledge transfer and will

be brought forward for consideration in the framing of the study’s research questions.

2.3.4.4 Organisational Culture

Organisational culture is complex. Pulling together the contribution of several theorists in

this area (Davenport & Prusak 1998; Hackett 2000; Probst, Raub & Romhardt 2000), it

can be asserted that an organisation’s culture can defined by many influencers including:

• the organisation’s values;

• climate of trust;

• attitude to risk and innovation;

• style and frequency of communication;

• style of leadership;

• level and use of technology;

• design of jobs, organisational structure and work processes; and

• reward mechanisms/incentives.


The prevailing organisational culture has a huge impact on both willingness to share

knowledge, and on willingness to adopt practices from another area (Hackett 2000; Wah

1999). Davenport and Prusak (1998) comment that knowledge management initiatives

that don’t fit well with an organisations culture, won’t survive.

In 2000, a major study of Knowledge Management experiences was undertaken by a

working group from leading organisations, under the guidance of the Conference Board

(Hackett 2000). The project involved interviews with 200 executives from 158 global

companies. Each of the companies participating in the survey had on average 40 000

employees, with the US being the headquarters for most respondents (85%). European

and Asia pacific headquarters were represented as 13 % and 2% respectively.

The findings were very illuminating in terms of the impact of organisational culture on the

relative success or failure of knowledge management programs. The findings were that the

second biggest barrier to knowledge programs working was a culture of hoarding

knowledge, with functional silos being the third most reported barrier. The main obstacle

to successful knowledge management was that the need to manage knowledge has not

been clearly articulated at senior levels within the organisation. This point is discussed in

greater detail later in the report. Figure 2.5 on the following page presents the top 15

reasons cited for the failure of knowledge management programs. As shown, many

barriers are related to organisational culture.


Figure 2.5: Obstacles to implementation of effective knowledge management programs

(Hackett 2000, p 8).

O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998) pose the following key question about organisational

culture: ‘How can people be motivated and rewarded for sharing?’

They comment that most managers have never learned ‘how to learn’, especially

cooperatively with many American schools and colleges, stressing individuality and

competition, not collaboration and sharing. O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998) believe

that real cultural support must be in evidence if we are to avoid the stress placed on

halla

This figure is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library


individuals who work on knowledge sharing initiatives which have long term payoffs.

Their colleagues may be saying to them, ‘Why are you spending your time doing this kind

of thing? We need you here’. This reality highlights the importance of communication to

explain and build support for knowledge management initiatives.

Texas Instruments (TI) experiences in attempting to achieve knowledge transfer (cited in

O’Dell and Jackson Grayson, 1998) revealed four cultural barriers to sharing knowledge.

These were:

• Current financial measures encouraged competition among plants

• Plant management had no responsibility for sharing

• There was no common vocabulary to facilitate conversation, and

• There had never been a rallying cry for common purpose.

Texas Instruments responded to these barriers by physically transferring people from high-

performing plants to those that needed help but also, created a common business process

map for wafer fabrication, reallocated funding to the least productive plants, gave plant

managers common goals, and built sharing networks to support the process. They also

reinforced worldwide sharing by measuring and rewarding plant managers for overall

wafer fab results, not just their own plant’s performance. O’Dell and Jackson Grayson

(1998) commented that an organisational culture that fostered a vibrant sense of curiosity

and a deep respect and desire for learning from others, was key.

3M’s experience in developing an effective knowledge sharing culture has been well

reported in the literature in Davenport and Prusak (1998), and Probst, Raub and Romhardt

(2000). 3M provides a striking example of culture that encourages and enables knowledge

transfer. Deeply ingrained beliefs and values at 3M have encouraged knowledge transfer

and led to significant investment in the machinery of transfer. Delegating responsibility,

tolerating creative mistakes, and respecting individual talents at all levels in the firm have

been part of the company’s culture almost from the beginning. Researchers at all levels


are expected to spend fifteen percent of their work time on personal research interests. All

are eligible to apply for grants to support their research and encouraged to involved other

employees in their projects. Making knowledge widely available and giving people time

to play around with it has led to some notably new products. Davenport and Prusak

(1998) report that knowledge sharing has been achieved not by technology, but by a

culture of sharing knowledge.

Wah (1999) has also stressed how important it is that there is a shift in corporate culture

for a knowledge management program to be effective. She asserts that the new culture

must be woven into every business process. Furthermore, she identifies the key to success

as a culture that instils knowledge sharing as a trait deeply embedded through the

enterprise. Wah makes an interesting comment that culture shifts won’t really hold…..

‘unless the leadership embraces practices and supports an interactive learning

environment’ (Wah 1999, p. 24).

O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (2001, pp. 2-3) have identified the following negative

organisational-cultural influencers on knowledge transfer :

1. Oranisational structures which promote ‘silo’ thinking, in which locations,

divisions and functions focus on maximising their own accomplishments and

rewards, hoarding information and thereby sub optimising the total organisation.

2. A culture which values personal technical expertise and knowledge creation over

knowledge sharing. This is rampant in engineering and knowledge-based

organisations such as consulting and research firms.

3. An over reliance on transmitting ‘explicit’ rather than ‘tacit’ information.

4. Not allowing or rewarding people for taking the time to learn and share and help

each other outside of their own small corporate village.

O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998) assert that these aspects must be addressed in order

for the transfer process to have a chance of working. One reason that internal transfer is


so difficult is that these enablers have been poorly understood and were rarely addressed

in earlier attempts.

To understand organisational culture better, Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000, pp. 260-

261) have identified nine questions relating specifically to the existence of a knowledge

culture. These questions include:

• Are employees encouraged to share their knowledge?

• Is the working atmosphere open and trusting?

• Is customer value the main objective of knowledge transfer?

• Do employees regularly and creatively discuss their visions of the company’s

future?

• Does the firm provide enough information, incentives and resources to enable

employees to build up the skills that they need?

• Do employees continually improve their knowledge and skills

2.3.4.5 Differences in Individual Learning Styles

There has been extensive research undertaken into the impact of different individual

learning styles on learning. This in turn has direct relevance for our study of factors

impacting on knowledge transfer. Influential theorists in this area in addition to those

theorists already referred to in Section 2.2.1, include Clare Graves (1970) & Ken Wilber

(2001) whose multi-level models and theories highlight the complexity and

interconnectivity of factors impacting on how individuals learns.

Gamble and Blackwell (2001, p. 161) asserts strongly that if an effective KM systems is to

be introduced it must overtly recognize individual differences and preferred learning

styles. When consideration is given to the influence of country culture as discussed in

section 2.3.4.3 on individual learning styles, an additional layer of complexity is revealed

in this factorial analysis.


2.3.4.6 Fear of Change

Resistance to or fear of change is an factor often proposed as impacting on knowledge

transfer (Kanouse & Jacoby 1988). As was mentioned earlier, the subject of change has

been an area of intense organisational interest since the eighties. Resistance to change is

a by-product of many other factors including organisational culture, external

environmental or market conditions, individual absorptive capacity, individual motivation,

and an individuals previous experience of change to name but a few (Davenport & Prusak

1998; Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Szulanski 1996). These factors will be discussed

individually in greater detail, in later sections.

Davenport and Prusak (1998, p.103) report on Mobil’s experience in encountering

resistance to knowledge transfer and take-up. They assert that resistance to abandoning

procedures that have been successful for years is a universal phenomenon, which is not

limited to Mobil.

2.3.4.7 Push and Pull factors

‘Push’ and ‘pull’ factors are designed by organisations to encourage knowledge

distribution and take-up. The design of these drivers and knowledge enablers has a direct

impact on an organisational culture. Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000) describe a push

factor as a process an organisation creates to push knowledge down an organisation and to

motivate its uptake. Typical ‘push’ processes include training sessions, use of experts to

distribute knowledge or the setting of goals to drive knowledge uptake.

Dixon (2000) provides several examples of push factors at Ford. One key driver is the

performance management system. All plants at Ford have to improve productivity each

year by 5%. This goal encourages them to look at best practices from other plants to see if

there are best practices which will help them to achieve this goal. Additionally a central

system pushes documentation on best practices out to each plant. For each best practice

received, the plant has to declare whether they will accept or reject the best practice. This

is another driver. All plants are assumed to have best practices, and it is expected that


these will be documented. The Vice-Presidents review the number and location of best

practices documented and implemented. Those plants not submitting best practices are

‘pushed’ to do so. Additionally it is a considerable source of pride for a plant if there best

practices are being implemented in other plants. This is clearly an important element of

their organisational culture.

Buckman laboratories use of ‘push factors’ for knowledge transfer is well reported in the

literature (Dixon 2000; Housel Bell & Gamble 2001; Liebowitz 1999; Probst, Raub &

Romhardt 2000). Buckman laboratories have created techno forums for knowledge

sharing and discussion with strong processes to ensure that all requests for information are

followed up. Additionally they provide both financial rewards and accelerated promotion

to management, for peoples who show themselves to be best at knowledge sharing.

Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000) describe the ‘pull’ factor principle as focussed on the

knowledge user and their needs. The knowledge user must be able to locate and obtain

knowledge himself quickly where necessary.

The type and nature of push and pull factors are an important element of the design of

knowledge transfer systems, and will have a direct impact on the organisations culture.

This point again highlights the complexity and interplay of the many influencers on

knowledge transfer and will be brought forward for consideration in the development of

the research questions.

2.3.4.8 Psycho-Social Filter and Trust issues

‘People judge the information and knowledge they get in significant measure on the

basis of who gives it to them. We judge people on reputation’ (Davenport & Prusak

1998, p. 100).


In their study on organisational learning and knowledge processes in a bio-medical

consortium, Andrews and Delahaye (2000) found that micro-processes emerged as highly

influential in knowledge transfer with individual perceptions of approachability,

credibility and trustworthiness mediating knowledge importing and knowledge sharing

activities. Their ideas are reflected in Figure 2.6 below.

Figure 2.6: The Psycho-Social Filter (Andrews 2000, p. 214).

The importance of a quality relationship had already been identified by Szulanksi (1996)

who asserted that one of the key disablers of knowledge transfer is a laborious and distant

relationship between the source and recipient: individuals involved in the transfer do not

have credibility with one another and therefore have difficulty validating the practice.

O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998) also provide support for Andrew and Delahaye’s

(2000) model through their comments that internal transfer is a ‘people-to-people’

process; relationships seem to precede and be required for meaningful sharing and

transfer. Therefore it can be summarised that the credibility of the source, the level of trust

between the sender and receiver, and the opportunity for relationship development all

mediate the knowledge transfer process.

halla



2.3.4.9 Status

The perceived status of the person distributing the knowledge has also been reported to

have a direct impact on knowledge transfer. This factor relates directly to the previous

discussion regarding the psycho-social filter. The literature reveals that junior staff are

less effective as transfer agents – even if they have the same knowledge as more

senior/experienced staff (Dixon 2000).

2.3.4.10 Importance of multiple channels

The comment has been made previously about the importance of assessing the suitability

of different channels, for different audiences and different objectives (Dixon 2000, p.

144). Davenport supports this view and states that multiple channels reinforce one

another with each adding value in a different way – and that their synergy enhances use.

(Davenport cited in Cortada & Woods 1999, p. 102)

2.3.4.11 Support from senior management

Knowledge management programs benefit tremendously from senior management

support. (Davenport & Prusak 1998; O’Dell & Jackson Grayson 1998). In fact senior

management sponsorship is critical, with Hackett (2000) reporting that the major barrier to

successful KM initiatives, was that the need to manage knowledge was not clearly

articulated at a senior level.

O’Dell & Jackson Grayson (1998) believe that most people have a natural desire to learn,

to share what they know and to make things better. This natural desire is thwarted by a

variety of logistical, structural and cultural hurdles and deterrents that we erect in

organisations. With regard to leadership specifically, they comment that a leadership

team and culture supportive of knowledge transfer requires a common focus and common

fate among all employees. Without it, people have little incentive to overcome other

obstacles that time and space create.


2.3.4.12 Technology

Technology has become an important enabler of communication within organisations.

Hackett’s survey found that many organisations felt that a lack of proper technology for

sharing knowledge was a barrier to effective knowledge management. O’Dell and

Jackson Grayson (1998) comment on this point, that technology should no longer be a

major barrier to identifying and notifying the organisation of best practices. All the

necessary software solutions already exist from Lotus Notes and other Groupware to

powerful and user-friendly databases to email and internal intranets. However, they do

not believe that technology is the solution for knowledge transfer. Rather, technology is

seen as having a helpful role to play, but it will not be the driver of knowledge transfer, for

two reasons:

1. All the important information about a process is too complex and too experiential

to be captured electronically, and

2. The incentives for and barriers to sharing are not technical.

This view is supported by Prusak (cited in Cortada & Woods 1999, p. 3), who states that

most technology is only focussed on making available explicit knowledge.

2.3.4.13 Motivation

There are many definitions and theories of motivation. The Latin root of the word

motivation means to ‘move’. Therefore in a basic sense, the study of motivation is the

study of action (Eccles 2002). As has been mentioned previously, Maslow (1943) was an

influential writer on motivation and believed that motivation was directly related to the

satisfaction of a hierarchy of needs. Modern theories of motivation believe that action is

related to beliefs, values and goals.

An important theory of motivation is called Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964). This

theory describes how individuals make decisions regarding various behavioural

alternatives. It considers which elements of motivation:


a. Energise Behaviour – What initiates a behaviour and determines the level of

effort?

b. Direct Behaviour –What determines what behaviour an individual chooses?

c. Sustains behaviour – What determines an individual’s level of persistence?

A representation of this theory is provided in Figure 2.7 below.

Figure 2.7: Expectancy Theory

Szulanski (1996) studied 122 best practice transfers within 8 companies. A lack of

motivation was identified as one of the top three factors impacting on knowledge transfer.

Some of the reasons for this lack of motivation included rivalry between departments or

areas of the company, general resistance to change, and the well-known ‘Not Invented

Here’ or NIH syndrome. From the descriptions and definitions above, it is clear that there

is complexity in understanding all of the influencers on an individual’s motivation.

2.3.4.14 Absorptive Capacity

A lack of absorptive capacity was another key factor identified by Szulanski (1996) as

impacting on knowledge transfer. Lack of absorptive capacity is evident when a recipient

individual does not have the time, energy or resources to value, assimilate and apply the

new knowledge.

= X XMotivational Force

Force Directing Specific Behavioural Alternatives

Valance

Value of expected outcomes to be the individual

Self-Efficacy Goal Difficulty

Perceived Control

Trust Control Policies

Values Needs Goals

Preferences

Instrumentality

Perceived probability that good performance will lead

to desired outcomes (Rewards)

Expectancy Perceived probability that Effort will lead to good

performance


2.3.4.15 Market Conditions

An external driver on knowledge transfer and uptake is the market or competitive

environment within which a person or company operates. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)

state that conditions of uncertainty force companies to seek knowledge held by those

outside the organisation. They provide several examples of Japanese companies who

when struggling against tough international competition, are forced to innovate and to

anticipate change. Clearly the fear of ‘not surviving’ is a key driver of knowledge transfer

in these circumstances, and is an area worthy of further research attention.

2.3.5 Measurement tools and processes for knowledge transfer

‘What can’t be measured can’t be managed’ (Anonymous, cited in Probst, Raub &

Romhardt, 2000, p. 244).

The subject of knowledge measurement is of great interest to many theorists and

practitioners. This is because we know that in order to measure the success of knowledge

management, we need to be able to measure knowledge. Probst, Raub and Romhardt

(2000) believe that this is nearly impossible to achieve because the value of knowledge

depends on the circumstances. To quantify knowledge, they assert that we must objectify

it and this means separating it from particular situations, times and people. They comment

that organisations can only control knowledge indirectly, by controlling the context within

which it operates. Perkmann (2002) supports the views of Probst, Raub and Romhardt

(2000) when he comments on the challenge in establishing a direct causal link between

concrete initiatives and their impact on business performance.

An illustration of this point can be seen in the knowledge activity network model

developed by Wiig (1996) and shown on the following page.


Figure 11.1 Structured network, adapted from Wiig (1996) (cited in Probst, Raub & Romhardt

2000, p. 247).

In Figure 11.1, each arrow represents a theory about a causal relationship. This model

points to the independencies that underlie different processes and highlights the

difficulties in demonstrating the impact of different knowledge management initiatives.

Having commented on the inherent difficulty in measuring knowledge and knowledge

transfer, it is useful to review some of the measures that organisations are using. These

measures can relate to cost savings, revenue generation, impact on decision making and

employee perceptions of efficiency. Texas Instruments and Ford both report the impact

of knowledge transfer in terms of cost savings or productivity improvements at their

manufacturing sites (Dixon 2000). Liebowitz (1999) reports that Buckman laboratories

assess the effectiveness of KM by measuring the percentage of revenues derived from new

products while General Motors attempts to measure the effect of knowledge on decision

making. They are doing this by attempting to implement a program of decision audits –

halla



particularly with regard to new car development decisions. Perkmann (2002) reports that

BT & MWH are using a range of measurement tools to assess knowledge transfer

including anecdotal and case study evidence of knowledge transfer, feedback from users

or participants, large-scale user surveys and indirect measures such as system usage. On

this last point, Perkmann comments that system usage is very easy to measure but there is

no guarantee that this will actually result in individual or business performance. He

believes that the measure is too indirect and that quantitative tools should only be used as

a supporting heuristic.

From this review of measurement practices in organisations it is evident that there are

many indicators of knowledge and knowledge transfer available although the reliability of

some as an effective measurement instrument, has been questioned.

Kaplan and Norton (1992) have developed a method of incorporating knowledge into an

organisations management and monitoring systems. This model or method is called the

Balanced Score card. Their model provides four perspectives on company activity: from

the customer’s perspective: finance, internal business processes and learning and growth.

This model is presented in Figure 11.2 below.


Figu

re 1

1.2

Bal

ance

d sc

orec

ard.

Ada

pted

and

repr

inte

d by

per

mis

sion

of H

arva

rd B

usin

ess R

evie

w. F

rom

“T

he B

alan

ced

Scor

ecar

d –

Mea

sure

s tha

t Driv

e Pe

rfor

man

ce”,

by

R.S

. Kap

lan

& D

.P. N

orto

n, Ja

n./F

eb. 1

992.

C

opyr

ight

by

the

Pres

iden

t and

Fel

low

s of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge; a

ll rig

hts r

eser

ved.

halla



While not providing knowledge indicators specifically, this strategic model seeks to link

operational interventions in the organisations knowledge base, with long-term goals and

provides a useful framework for considering measurable variables or indicators.

Several useful models for identifying classes of indicators and for measuring knowledge,

have been developed by North, Probst and Romhardt (1998). Table 2.3 shows one

approach to identifying indicators across four classes. This model demonstrates a clear

relationship between cause and effect. North, Probst and Romhardt (1998) have

developed a multi-dimensional system for developing knowledge which is illustrated

below in Table 2.3. Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000) comment that every organisation

must decide what are the most important indices for them, given their mission, resources,

and environment.

Table 2.3: Classes of indicators

(North, Probst and Romhardt, 1998 - cited in Probst, Raub & Romhardt 2000, p. 256).

halla



Before closing the discussion on knowledge measurement, it is useful to consider a

number of other challenges within organisations with regard to knowledge measurement.

Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000, pp. 248-249) believe that a range of problems may

affect the measurement process. These problems include:

• Knowledge that is critically important to the company’s competitive position may

not be sufficiently recognised, or recognised at all.

• There are no monitoring systems to measure changes in the individual building

blocks of knowledge management (e.g. changes in transparency of knowledge,

knowledge development).

• Only internal indices are used; there are no measures that could show how the

company’s knowledge resources are developing compared with those of

competitors.

• The skills and abilities of individuals are measured, but collective knowledge is

neglected.

• Only the inputs are measured (e.g. expenditure on training) and not outputs (e.g.

the success of that training)

• Quantitative measures are preferred, and qualitative ones are neglected.

• The measurements have an internal frame of reference; there are no comparisons

with external competitors or leading companies.

• People measure things that are easy to measure, without considering what use the

results will be.

Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000, p. 250) assert that this list of problems (which is not

exhaustive), shows how important it is to have a well-considered knowledge measurement

system. This is clearly a contentious and multifaceted area deserving further research

attention and will be brought forward for inclusion in the study’s research questions.


2.3.6 Summary

Sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 of this chapter have reviewed the literature on knowledge

management, knowledge transfer and knowledge measurement. In the following section,

the literature is drawn together and the three research questions are formally stated.

2.4 Summary and Research Questions

Sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 have introduced the research literature in the study’s area of

interest. The purpose of this concluding section, is to summarise key issues arising from

the literature and to formally state the three research questions which will guide the study.

There are many definitions of knowledge to be found in the literature. This review has

revealed the inherent complexity of knowledge as an entity, and as an object for study. As

was identified by Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000), the value of knowledge depends on

the circumstances. To quantify knowledge, we must objectify it and this means separating

it from particular situations, times and people. However, while it is a difficult area for

study, it is a worthwhile area for research. As has been stated earlier, the study of

knowledge creation, knowledge development, knowledge transfer, knowledge

measurement and knowledge management, is a relatively new area of organisational and

research interest. While anecdotes abound with regard to various knowledge management

initiatives undertaken by different organisations, there is a lack of systematic study on

knowledge transfer in organisations (Dixon 2000, p. 172; von Krogh, Ichijo & Nonaka

2000). Thus, much of the KM theory is based on limited and often anecdotal evidence.

This is particularly the case for knowledge transfer within different cultural contexts.

The existing literature does however provide a sound basis for developing research

questions to guide further study in the area. Clearly it is important to examine how

knowledge is carried or transferred within an organisation. The review of the existing

literature within this chapter has described a number of ways that knowledge can be

transferred within organisations, and has made suppositions as to the varying levels of


effectiveness of each medium. A detailed study should reveal and/or validate the most

effective transfer mediums.

As knowledge develops, its size and shape is clearly mediated by a broad range of factors.

The review of the literature has identified a myriad of factors including but not limited to,

national culture, organisational culture, motivation, market conditions, absorptive

capacity, technology and the design of knowledge transfer systems themselves. Which

factors most influence this movement process, and in which ways, is also of key interest.

Finally, with consideration for the complex and often invisible nature of knowledge, a

question of key relevance to all organisations emerges: ‘How can we determine or

measure that knowledge transfer has actually occurred?’ The discussion in section 2.3.5

highlighted the difficulty and importance of this activity in an organisational context.

Clearly, it is also an area worthy of further research attention.

Pulling together all of these findings, three well-justified questions emerge for

investigation in the present study. These are:




In conclusion, the review of the existing literature has highlighted the value of undertaking

a theory building research study in the area of knowledge transfer, guided by the three

research questions described above. A company has been identified with a formal two-

year-old knowledge transfer program in place, within a global environment. This

organisation will therefore provide an ideal setting within which to investigate knowledge

transfer across countries and cultural contexts.

Chapter Two has established a clear research agenda for the study. In Chapter Three the

research methodology and its methodological justification will be described.

CHAPTER 3 - Research Strategy and Methodology 56

CHAPTER 3 - RESEARCH STRATEGY AND

METHODOLOGY

In the previous chapter, the justification for the research project was outlined in terms of

the current literature on knowledge management. From the gaps in the literature, three

research questions emerged for investigation. This chapter discusses the selection of the

research methodology used to examine knowledge transfer processes across countries and

cultures and subsequently to build new theory and test existing theory related to

knowledge transfer. The first half of this chapter is organised in three parts. The first part

justifies the selection of the research paradigm deemed most appropriate for the nature of

this research. The second part outlines why a combined qualitative and quantitative

approach was selected within the selected research paradigm. And the third part justifies

why a case study was selected. The key steps in the selection of a research methodology

are outlined in Figure 3.1 below.

Figure 3.1: Overview of Research Study Methodological Selection

selection

Review and evaluate research paradigms

Research paradigm selected

Section 3.1

Compare and contrast appropriateness of

qualitative vs quantitative research

design

Mixed research design selected

Section 3.2

Review and evaluate methods

Case Study approach selected

Section 3.3

PARADIGM DESIGN

Review data collection methods

Section 3.4

APPROACH


Three factors influenced the selection of the research paradigm which was used to address

the research questions. The first of these was the nature of the research questions

themselves. Secondly, recommendations on research approach were sought from within

the knowledge management literature. Thirdly, recommendations were identified within

the literature pertaining to research strategy. These three influences are represented in

Figure 3.2 below:

Figure 3.2: Overview of Factors Influencing Research Methodology Selection

A short description of each of these influencers is provided below. As outlined in Chapter

two, the three identified research questions for this project were:

1. By what means is knowledge transferred across countries and cultures

2. What factors impact on knowledge transfer across countries and cultures

3. What are the indicators of knowledge transfer across countries and cultures

These questions were derived from an examination of the existing literature on knowledge

transfer, and more specifically from identification of gaps within the existing literature.

The literature review highlighted the complex, socially constructed and ‘living’ nature of

knowledge (Allee 1997; Davenport, De Long & Beers 1998; van der Spek & Spijkervet,

Factors Influencing Research Methodology Selection

Recommendations from review of literature on

knowledge management

Recommendations from review of literature on

research methodology

Nature of the research questions themselves


1997). It was therefore deemed to be a subject that could not be analysed, measured and

understood adequately through a single, highly structured and defined research approach,

but needed to have a more open approach with several data collection processes and

provision for opportunistic exploration of issues as they emerged. The questions

themselves were focussed on three specific areas within the knowledge transfer field.

This delineated a structure within which to identify further questions as a part of the

overall research approach.

The second area impacting on the selection of research paradigm was from the

recommendations made within the literature on knowledge transfer. The existing

literature provided many anecdotal examples of how knowledge was transferred in

organisations and of the many factors that impact on the transfer process. There was

however a lack of systematic and structured research in this area, as a result of the fact that

knowledge transfer was a relatively new area of organisational interest (Dixon, 2000).

With regard to the measurement of knowledge transfer processes specifically, Perkmann

(2002) recommended use of a case study approach. Thus knowledge transfer within an

organisational setting was identified as an area ripe for further research, with a case study

approach being recommended as an appropriate research vehicle.

The third factor influencing the choice of research paradigm was an examination of the

literature pertaining to research strategy itself. This review revealed that the research

approach for this study was exploratory in nature, with the design of the research

instruments being driven by existing theory. More detail and explanation in this area is

provided in Section 3.1.


3.1 Factors to Consider in Research Selection

‘Philosophers and methodologists have been engaged in a long standing debate on how

best to conduct research’ (Patton 1990, p. 37).

This section overviews the literature on the selection of research paradigm, and then

describes the factors which most influenced the choice of research strategy for this study.

The choice of paradigm is fundamental to research, since the paradigm reflects what is

seen as important, legitimate, and reasonable (Patton 1990). It portrays an understanding

of the world, and is used to determine what problems deserve research attention, and how

the research might be conducted (Deshpande 1983; Lincoln & Guba 1985).

There are two major epistemological approaches to conducting research. Epistemology

has long been concerned with the opposing views of logical positivism and idealism

(Patton 1990). The former (positivist or ‘nomothetic’ research) typically relies on

quantitative and experimental methods to test hypothetical-deductive generalisation. The

latter called ‘interpretivism’, typically uses qualitative methods to understand human

experience in the context of real life settings.

The selection of an appropriate paradigm for investigation, and thus a broad class of

research methods, is not always made on the merits of the situation, but on the grounds of

methodological orthodoxy or personal experience of a single paradigm (Patton 1990):

‘The issue then becomes one of not whether one has uniformly adhered to prescribed

canons of either logical positivism or phenomenology (interpretivism) but whether one has

made sensible methods decisions given the purpose of the inquiry, the questions

investigated, and the resource available. The paradigm of choices recognises that different

methods are appropriate for different situations. Situational responsiveness means

designing a study that is appropriate for a specific inquiry situation’ (Patton 1990, p. 39).


Perry and Coote (1994, p. 103) make the following comments about the two paradigms:

‘In comparison to positivist research, interpretive research considers words rather than

numbers as the major elements of data; tends to be more inductive ... aims at internal

validity through information-richness ... tends to use data within its context, from the field

... includes subjective information collected from interviews rather than concentrating only

on objective value-free data ... tends to pay more attention to particulars while also being

more broadly focussed.’

It was the researcher’s assessment that this research project stemmed from the positivist

paradigm for the following main reasons:

• The research questions have been developed with consideration for existing theory.

• A questionnaire survey instrument was used as the principal data gathering tool

• The survey questions were well defined, although there was ample provision for

open ended responses to questions and opportunistic data collection.

However, the overall research design for the project combined various research methods,

calling for the integration of different theoretical perspectives rather than being wedded to

a particular theoretical style or paradigm with its particular features and limitations. For

example, the research approach included both objective and subjective elements. While

an essentially quantitative and deductive approach was used for analysing the

questionnaire, a qualitative and inductive approach was used when combining and

analysing the data pulled together from all sources. The data was analysed drawing on the

researcher’s deep knowledge of the organisation, and intuition. The latter step clearly

involved subjective interpretation on behalf of the researcher. Brewer and Hunter (1989)

comment that there are distinct advantages for theoretically oriented research in adopting

what they describe as a ‘multi-method’ approach. They also use the term ‘paradigmatic

pragmatism’ to describe the process of synthetic problem formulation and theory

generation.


Having described the overall research approach, it is now appropriate to consider the next

question in research design. This is the question of whether a qualitative or quantitative

methodology is more appropriate given the nature of the study. A consideration of those

factors influencing this decision is outlined in the next section.

3.2 The Case for a Qualitative Methodology

The decision as to whether a qualitative methodology is more appropriate than a

quantitative methodology involves consideration of several criteria. A brief examination

of the literature in this regard follows.

Lee (1999, p. 41) states that if a researcher can answer in the affirmative to one or more of

the following questions, then a qualitative research design is to be preferred over a

quantitative design :

- Is it important for the researcher to understand the in-depth processes that operate

within the organisation or industry?

- Do the research issues involve poorly understood organisational phenomena and

systems?

- Is the researcher interested in the differences between stated organisational policies

and their actual implementation (e.g. strategic versus operating plans)?

- Does the researcher want to study ill-structured linkages within organisational

entities?

- Does the study involve variables that do not lend themselves to experiments for

practical or ethical reasons?

- Is the point of the study to discover new or thus far unspecified variables?

In the present study, affirmative answers can be given to some of these questions

indicating that the survey will clearly have elements requiring a qualitative approach.

However, with the subject of research being an existing knowledge transfer program, there


are clearly elements which can be tested through a more structured quantitative approach

as well.

Choice of approach is also influenced by the objective of the study with regard to the

development or testing of theory. Bonoma (1985), Lincoln and Guba (1985) and Neuman

(1994) all assert that a qualitative approach is more theory-building than theory-testing

oriented. It is the researcher’s assessment that this study has both of these objectives.

According to Minichello et al (1995, p. 9), ‘qualitative research attempts to capture

people’s meanings, definitions, and descriptions of events. In contrast, quantitative

research aims to count and measure things.’ Indeed, qualitative methods are ‘ways of

finding out what people do, know, think, and feel by observing, interviewing, and

analysing documents’ (Patton 1990, p. 94). Miles (1984) makes the point that qualitative

data with its emphasis on people’s lived experiences is fundamentally well-suited for

locating the meanings people place on events, processes and structures in their lives; their

perceptions, assumptions, prejudgments, presuppositions, and for connecting these

meanings to the social world around them. This research project had an approach which

involved both the counting of responses to certain questions as well as an examination of

the respondents’ feelings towards the subject matter as reflected in their words. The latter

is peculiar to a qualitative approach.

As explained in the next section, this research project used a structured interview as the

principal data-gathering tool. Qualitative techniques based on interviews, as were

conducted, are well-validated (Cavana, Delahaye & Sekaran 2001; Denzin & Lincoln

1994; Eisenhardt 1989; Gilchrist 1992; Minichello et al. 1995; Zikmund 1997).

In summary, there is ample justification for the application of a largely qualitative

methodology for this project. The next section will present the arguments for the selection

of a case study approach.


3.3 The Argument for a Case Study Approach

Building on the methodological discussion from the previous two sections, it is now

appropriate to review the theoretical arguments supporting the use of a specific research

approach. For this project a case study research approach was selected. Section 3.3.1

provides an overview of the reasons for this decision together with the advantages of the

case study approach, while Section 3.3.2 highlights the criticisms and limitations of this

approach.

3.3.1 Advantages of Case Study Approach

There is significant methodological justification within the research literature for

conducting a case study approach for this study. An overview of these arguments is

outlined below. The first of these arguments relates to the objectives of the study.

Marshall and Rossman (1995) and Yin (1994) state that when the main purpose of the

research project is exploratory, then a case study approach is an appropriate strategy.

More specifically, Yin (1994) asserts that the case study is appropriate for exploratory

analysis when investigating contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, and

when the boundaries between the phenomena and the context are not clear. Furthermore,

case studies are the strategy of choice when the focus is on understanding the dynamics

present within single settings, and when existing theory seems inadequate (Eisenhardt

1989).

The second key factor which influenced the use of a case study, related to the nature of

what was being studied. As stated previously, the study of knowledge transfer is complex

and involves examination of human factors such as perception, feelings and impact of

culture. Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe (1991, p. 24) indicate that:


‘research problems in case study investigations often involve an understanding of

managerial perceptions or culture where meanings are socially-constructed rather than

being value-free’

This was certainly the case for this study on knowledge transfer.

A further advantage of the case study approach with regard to this study relates to style

and structure. A case study approach permits ‘flexible and opportunistic data collection

methods that allow additions to questions during interviews’ (Easterby-Smith 1994, p.

532; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe & Lowe 1991). This capacity to add questions was

considered very valuable in the current study with its objectives of exploration and theory

building.

An overview of other researchers’ comments on the general advantages of the case study

approach, is outlined below. These comments provide further justification and support for

the research design selection decision:

• Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1999), Emory and Cooper (1991) and Neuman

(1994) all agree that a simple, well-constructed case study can enable a researcher

to challenge an existing theory and to provide a source of new hypotheses.

• Torraco (1997) believes that case studies more than any other method offer the

greatest potential for revealing richness, holism and complexity in events.

• Adelman et al (1983, pp. 8-9) believe the advantages of case study research to be

that it is strong in reality, allows generalisation either about an instance or from an

instance, recognises the complexity of social truths, and represents the

discrepancies or conflicts between the viewpoints held by participants.

• Dick (1990, p. 10) contends that case research deals with the world on its own

terms by enabling a greater depth of description.


• Stake (1983, p. 73) states that case studies are valuable because they utilise the

reader’s knowledge and experience. Stake argues that this use of the reader’s own

experiences and tacit knowledge will enable them to generalise from the case and

aid in their own understanding. This is particularly true for this study as the

researcher had an intimate knowledge of the organisation and was well known to

the survey respondents.

Overall, it is the researcher’s view that the key strengths of the case-study approach which

are most relevant to this project include: the capacity to utilise the researchers experience,

insights feelings, and values in the analysis findings; the capacity to manage complexity

and ambiguity; and the potential to develop new theory.

However, there are several criticisms of the case study approach. Some of these criticisms

reveal that a case study’s strengths may indeed also be its weakness. Outlined on the

following page is an overview of the key criticisms of the case study approach.

3.3.2 Criticisms of Case Study Approach

The most common criticisms of the case study approach are that it is subjective, lacks

statistical validity/is unscientific and has the potential for bias (Cavana, Delahaye &

Sekaran 2001; Emory & Cooper 1991, p 143; Hagg and Hedland (cited in Gummersson

1991)). Craig Smith (1991, p. 157) believes that the potential for bias comes from the

dependence on the researcher’s analytical skills and ability to maintain objectivity. In

their view, the researcher is at risk of becoming too close to the phenomenon.

Another limitation of the case study approach relates to the potential for developing and

testing theory. Hagg and Hedland (1991) believe that a case study approach can only be

used to generate hypotheses but not to test them, and that generalisations cannot be made

on the basis of results. Emory and Cooper (1991) and Yin (1994) make a similar point


when they comment that the problems associated with case studies include the difficulty

of supporting or rejecting hypotheses.

There are however limitations with any methodology used. If these limitations are

understood, then checks and balances can be incorporated into the research design

process. Strategies for limiting the impact of these factors are described in section 3.4.

With the research approach justified, attention can now move to describing the setting for

the case study.

3.3.3 Research Setting

From the analysis presented to date, it is clear that the characteristics of the research topic

favour an exploratory, qualitative, case study methodology. Of particular influence in

determining overall approach, have been the three research questions which were

developed out of the existing literature.

The research setting for this study was something of a natural choice for the researcher as

it was the organisation within which they were employed as the Knowledge Manager.

The organisation was global with operations in 200 countries. In 2000, this organisation

had developed and implemented a best practice knowledge transfer program in sales and

marketing for their National Marketing Companies (NMCs) of Europe, Middle East,

Africa and Latin America (EMEA LA). At the time of the study, the best practices

program was two years old. This duration of time had allowed the program sufficient

opportunity to demonstrate clear outcomes, which meets Yin’s criteria for a strong,

positive example in site selection (Yin 1994, p. 12). Additionally, it was an easily

accessible site for the researcher as an employee of the organisation, with significant

potential not only for follow-up but also for validation of all findings. Further, other

benefits of the site selection were that the researcher was not time constrained, had access


to a broad range of valuable evaluative data about the knowledge transfer program, and

benefited from their own experiences and perspectives on the program. The potential

richness of the analysis of the data was therefore believed to be quite deep.

3.3.4 Survey Participant Selection

The participants for the study were generally drawn from a pool of General Managers and

Sales Directors from the National Marketing Companys (NMCs). (The exception to this

was for the German NMC called START – where the head of Strategy was invited to

participate as they had been actively accessing the programs intranet site. There had been

no other involvement in the program from this NMC’s General Manager or Sales

Director). These senior roles were selected because they had had the most active

involvement with the best practices program, and because they were the roles with direct

accountability for implementing any changes in their market.

The maximum survey population for the study was sixty (60). The researcher was keen to

obtain interviews with a representative group from NMCs across all four regions. An

overview of the objectives for the size and makeup of the survey’s group, together with

the actual achievements are outlined in table 3.1 below.


Table 3.1: Criteria for survey participant selection with justification

Criteria Actual Justification

Size of group

Obtain a representative number of survey respondents

There are 60 NMC’s in EMEA LA. Survey with 28 of the 60 markets represents a 47% sample.

(n.b. Some markets were not approached to participate as a result of an organisational request. Refer to Appendix IV)

Of key importance was to obtain a group number of sufficient size to receive redundant data (Nair & Reige 1995). This was achieved after a relatively small number of interviews.

Geographic/Cultural representation

Achieve representation across all four regions i.e WE, CESE, MEA, LA

Representation as follows:

WE 7 CESE 6 MEA 9 LA 6 TOTAL 28

It was important that the survey group included respondents from across all regions and from a range of cultural perspectives to have credibility inside the organisation

Gender Representation

Achieve representative gender mix

Representation as follows:

Male 20

Female 8

TOTAL 28

This gender split closely reflects the ratio within the total NMC population in the region.

More detail on the validity of the group size is provided in Section 3.3.5.

Table 3.2 overleaf lists all roles interviewed and provides details of interviewee, region,

gender and ethnic origin of respondent. (Appendix X provides a list of the names of the

persons interviewed for the study.)


Table 3.2: List of details of survey respondents by region

Ref NMC Interviewee Region Gender Ethnic Origin

Role Interviewed

1 Argentina Stanley LA M Arg./Ital Sales Director

2 Austria Stanley WE M Aus. Sales & Marketing Director

3 BENELUX Stanley WE F Belg Director Sales & Business Development

BENELUX Stanley WE M Belg GM

BENELUX Stanley WE M Dutch Account Director, Director Sales

4 Brazil Stanley LA M Brzl Sales Director

5 Caribbean Stanley LA F US GM

6 CIS Stanley CESE M Turkish GM

7 CWA Lovelock MEA M French GM

8 Ecuador Stanley LA F Ecuador/Brasilian

GM

9 Egypt Stanley MEA M Egypt GM

10 Finland Lovelock WE F Fin Sales Manager

11 Ghana Lovelock MEA M Dane GM

12 Greece Stanley CESE M Spnsh GM

13 Israel Stanley LA M Israeli GM

14 Italy Stanley WE M Italian Sales Director

15 Malta Lovelock CESE M Maltese GM

16 Morocco Stanley MEA F Morocc Sales Director

17 Pakistan Lovelock MEA M Pakistan GM, Deputy GM and Training manager.

18 Paraguay Lovelock LA F Parag GM

19 Peru Lovelock LA M Peru GM

20 Poland Lovelock CESE F Polish Deputy GM

21 Scandinavia Stanley WE M Norweg Sales Dir-Norway

22 South Africa Stanley MEA M Germ/SA GM, Sales Director

23 Germany Stanley WE M German Strategy

24 Tunisia Stanley MEA M Tunisian Sales Director

25 Turkey Stanley CESE F Turkish GM/Sales Dir

26 UK Stanley WE M US Sales Director

27 Ukraine Stanley CESE M Ukraine GM & Sales Director

28 Zimbabwe Lovelock MEA M Zim GM


3.3.5 Methodological Validity of Makeup of sample

The researcher had two main objectives for the makeup and size of the survey sample.

Firstly, it was the researcher’s objective to seek as large a sample as possible within the

total identified population because of the organisation’s objective for using the survey

process itself, to prompt the NMCs’ interest in best practices from other markets. Thus

from the organisation’s point of view, the higher the sample size the better.

Secondly and more importantly from a research perspective, it was imperative to ensure

that the group size and composition provided a valid window for data gathering. It is

submitted that based on their deep knowledge of the organisation, the group size of 28

more than sufficiently achieved this. Nair and Reige (1995) provide support for this view

by suggesting that the group size is sufficient when redundant data begins to emerge. This

was the case for this study with redundant data appearing after ten interviews. Lincoln

and Guba (1985, p. 235) state that ‘it is usual to find that a dozen or so interviews, if

properly selected, will exhaust most available information’. Patton (1990, pp. 184-185)

believes that for qualitative inquiry there are no rules for sample size believing that:

‘... it depends on what you want to know, the purpose of the inquiry, what is at stake, what

will be useful, what will have credibility, and what can be done with the available time and

resources … The validity, meaningfulness and insights generated from qualitative inquiry

have more to do with the information-richness of the cases selected and the

observation/analytical capabilities of the researcher than with sample size.’

With consideration for the comments made by Patton (1990), the researcher can affirm

that the higher the number of interviews obtained across a representation of all regions, the

more credible the outcomes not only to the identified population, but also to the client

organisation. From a quality perspective, a smaller size would probably have provided

enough representativeness and information richness to answer the study’s three research

questions, and would have met the criteria for being of sufficient size to produce

redundant data as suggested by Nair and Reige (1995).


Perry and Coote (1994) mention the value in conducting interviews at different

hierarchical levels of a network of relationships. In the present study, interviews were

undertaken at two levels, i.e General Manager and or/direct report such as Sales Director,

although there were not expected to be differences in the results reported based upon the

managerial level of the respondent.

With consideration for all the views stated above and with consideration for the nature of

the target population, there appears to be ample justification for the respondent group size

obtained for this study.

The data collection methods that were considered and applied in this study will now be

outlined in Section 3.4.

3.4 Data Collection Methods

As was mentioned previously, a case method was chosen for this study. There are many

data collection methods available within a case study methodology. The data gathering

methods which were used in this study will now be described, together with the alternative

methods considered but not selected.

3.4.1 Overview of Methods Considered

3.4.1.1 The Questionnaire

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1999) assert that the questionnaire is one of the most

widely used survey data collection techniques. This is because it is an efficient way of

collecting responses from a large sample. Given that the nature of the information to be

collected related to an individuals experiences and perspectives on knowledge transfer, a

questionnaire used within an interview, was deemed to be the most appropriate data

collection tool available for this study. A more detailed explanation on the considerations

for, and steps involved in designing the survey are provided in Section 3.4.4.1.


Cavana, Delahaye and Sekaran (2001, p. 137) assert that the most common data collection

methods used are interviewing, focus groups and observation. A brief description of each

is provided below.

3.4.1.2. Interviews

Interviews provide a unique opportunity to uncover rich and complex information for an

individual. The face-to face interview can, under the guidance of an experienced

interviewer, encourage the interviewee to share intrinsic opinions and to dredge previously

un-thought of memories from the unconscious. (Cavana, Delahaye & Sekaran 2000, p.

138).

Minichello et al (1992, p. 101) believe that in-depth interviews, including structured

interviews, are particularly appropriate for theory-building methodologies as is the case

with this study. Interviews can be conducted face-to-face, via video-conference or by

telephone.

3.4.1.3 Focus Groups

The focus group method is a research technique that collects information through group

interaction. (Morgan 1997, cited in Cavana, Delahaye & Sekaran 2000, p. 153). Morgan

points out that the focus group provides direct and immediate evidence about similarities

and differences in participants’ opinions and experiences, as opposed to reaching some

conclusions from post hoc analysis of separate statements from each interviewee.

3.4.1.4 Observational Studies

Observational studies involve observing people in a natural work environment or in a lab

setting with their activities and behaviours recorded. These studies provide the

opportunity to observe their activities, movements, work habits, emotions and body

language. (Cavana, Delahaye & Sekaran 2000, p. 159).


3.4.2 Methods Rejected

A number of methods were considered appropriate for the nature of this study, but were

rejected for reasons including geographic spread, practicality, cost and/or lack of

suitability. These methods included:

• Individual (face-to-face) interviews with the key participants from markets

participating in the best practice program; and

• Focus Groups.

All of the participants within the best practices program were physically resident within

their country/market. They visited Nice in France, (the location for the researcher) on

average twice a year. Thus the window of opportunity to undertake this study on a face to

face basis through individual interviews or focus groups was very small. Additionally, the

cost of the researcher flying to each of the markets participating in the program was

prohibitive.

The focus group approach was also rejected because the nature of the information that was

being sought, did not relate to a group’s experiences of a phenomena, but rather to the

individual’s experience. Therefore a collective meeting was not considered of value in

terms of the study’s objectives.

3.4.3 Methods Selected

As was mentioned previously, the principal data-gathering tool selected for this study was

a survey interview conducted by telephone. A structured interview as defined by Kvale

(1983, p. 174) is:

‘an interview, whose purpose is to gather descriptions of the life-world of the

interviewee with respect to interpretation of the meaning of the described

phenomena.’


Neuman (1994) asserts that semi-structured interviews have the highest response rates of

all research methods, permit the longest questionnaires and allow the interviewer a vast

array of questioning techniques. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1999) comment that

questionnaires provide an efficient way of collecting responses from a large sample prior

to analysis. Within a semi-structured interview it is appropriate to utilise a questionnaire

to guide discussions.

For this study, it was beneficial that the researcher personally knew many of the

respondents to the survey and had insights into the sales and marketing challenges within

their markets. This was believed to have a positive impact on participant disclosure, and

enabled the interviewer to undertake informed probing in response to statements made.

More on the credibility of the researched is provided in Section 3.6 – Ensuring Case Study

Quality.

The interview data were also supplemented by secondary data sources including:

• feedback questionnaires from best practice forums;

• intranet usage statistics;

• commitment sheets from best practice forums; and from

• interviews with staff in the central organisation.

Additionally, the researcher had had the opportunity to observe many of the survey

respondents over the previous two years as they participated in Best Practice Forums. An

overview of the principal and secondary data collection methods used in the case study

are outlined in Table 3.3 below. For each method, a purpose is identified and the relevant

research questions noted.


Table 3.3: Overview of data methods employed

Data Method Purpose Research Questions

Principal

Structured telephone interviews with NMC staff

Seek feedback about distribution mechanisms for best practice transfer program.

Identify barriers to implementation

Seek evidence of implementation

1. By what means is knowledge transferred?

2. What factors impact on knowledge transfer?

3. What are the indicators of knowledge transfer?

Secondary

Observation Observe interest in practices from other markets

Identify barriers to considering practices from other markets


2. What factors impact on knowledge transfer?

3. What are the indicators of knowledge transfer?

Face to face interviews with Central Staff

Identify markets to be precluded from survey

Obtain perception of motivation of GM’s and key issues in markets

2. What factors impact on knowledge transfer? (Motivation)

Review intranet usage statistics

Evaluate effectiveness of technology as distribution mechanism


In summary, four data collection methods were employed in this study, including:

• telephone interviews utilising a structured survey instrument, but with opportunity for

probing and for opportunistic data collection;

• observation of best practice forums together with commitment report;

• face-to-face interviews with staff in central organisation; and

• review of intranet usage statistics.

Of these four, the telephone interview was the richest data collection process employed.

A description of each method used is provided below.


3.4.4 Primary Case Study Instrument –Telephone Interview

This section describes the process for developing the survey questionnaire used for the

telephone interview with NMCs. This process is represented in Figure 3.3 below.

Figure 3.3: Overview of process for developing survey instrument

Two key factors were taken into consideration in the design of the survey (as shown in

Figure 3.3). These factors were: the research questions themselves; along with the client’s

objectives for the survey. These processes are described in greater detail overleaf.

3.4.4.1 Development of Questionnaire

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1999) warn researchers that, ‘it is far harder to produce a

good questionnaire than one might think’. They cite several authors including Bell (1999)

and Oppenheim (1992) to support this view. They suggest that response rates, validity

and reliability can be maximised by:

• Careful design of individual questions

• Clear layout of the questionnaire form

• Lucid explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire and

• Pilot testing

Literature Review

Research Questions

KM process at case study site

Design Survey Questions &

Interview Guide

Pilot test Survey

Instrument

Amend survey instrument

Section 3.4.4.1 Section 3.4.4.2


These points were taken into consideration by the researcher in the design of the survey

questionnaire. The questions that were included in this questionnaire were developed

directly from the extant literature presented in Chapter Two, with consideration for the

knowledge management processes that had been established in the case study site. (A

copy of the study site’s knowledge management process is included in Appendix VI.)

Additionally, the client organisation had its own objectives for the survey which were

incorporated into the questionnaire design. Their main objective was to use the survey

process itself, to communicate and promote best practices from other markets. There were

eight key areas explored in the interview with regard to knowledge transfer.

These areas included:

• Best Practice documentation

• Best Practice Intranet

• Best Practice monthly email newsletter

• Best Practice forums

• Seeking input on Other mechanisms for sharing knowledge

• How they heard about best practices/How they like to hear about best practices

• Probing their markets best practices

• Obtaining evidence of knowledge transfer & creation

Barriers to implementation were identified through responses in each question block.

These areas are categorised against each of the research questions in Table 3.4.


Table 3.4: Summary of interview question areas by research question

Research Question 1 Research Question 2 Research Question 3 Org objective for communication

Distribution & Communication Mechanisms

What factors impact on knowledge transfer

Indicators of K Transfer

Prompting their participation/interest in program

Current • Documentation • Intranet • Newsletter • Forums Future • Four options

offered • How do they like to

hear about practices from other markets ?

Various questions prompt for information on budget/resource constraints, lack of information, cultural biases, other differences between markets, other reasons for non implementation

Using commitment sheets as starting point – seek evidence of transfer, creation and impact on business

Do you have best practices which could be shared?

A justification for each of the questions asked in the interview with consideration for the

objectives is provided in Appendix V.

Many factors need to be considered in the design and structure of questions. Emory and

Cooper (1991, pp. 356-359) propose four criteria for assessing whether or not a question

should be included in a surveying instrument. These criteria are:

• Should the question be asked?

• Is the question of proper scope?

• Can the respondent answer adequately? and

• Will the respondent answer willingly?

The survey questions in this study were specifically designed with consideration for these

points, and in such a way so as not to be leading. This would help to ensure the effects of

bias were minimised. (Emory & Cooper, 1991; Neuman, 1994). All questions were placed

in an appropriate order with consideration for logical sequencing. According to Emory and


Cooper (1991, p. 370), sequencing is dependent upon the nature of the group being tested.

As a guide, they recommend that:

• The question process must quickly awaken interest and motivate the respondent to

participate in the interview;

• The respondent should not be confronted by early requests for information that might

be considered personal or ego threatening;

• The questioning process should begin with simple items and move to the more

complex, and from general items to the more specific. This funnelling technique was

also recommended by Minichiello et al 1992; and

• Changes in frame of reference should be minimal and should be clearly pointed out.

A stem query structure was used for each of the question groups within the survey. The

stem introduced the topic in general terms, before actually asking the interviewee the

question. This technique was used to orient the interviewee to the particular topic and

helped improve the information generated in each question.

An introductory script was included at the start of the guide along with other notes

throughout the form for the interviewer, to smooth the passage of the interview. This

document is often called an interview guide and is a separate document to the interview

itself. For this study, the interview guide was incorporated in to the questionnaire.

As a final check to ensure that the questionnaire followed both a logical structure and that

the questions were not worded in such a way as to bias the results, the survey was checked

by a Senior Manager from the client organisation. Using a third party to verify the

instrument is an approach recommended by Zima (1991). The instrument was then pilot

tested to assess its ‘workability.’ This process is described in the following section.


3.4.4.2 Pilot Testing of Questionnaire

Pilot testing is an important step to be undertaken prior to the commencement of the

conduct of the survey. It allows the questionnaire to be tested and refined and can confirm

that there will be no problems in recording data. (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 1999). In

addition, it will enable the researcher to obtain some assessment of the questions validity

and the likely reliability of the data which will be collected.

The questionnaire used in the this survey was tested in a face to face interview with a

General Manager (GM) from a European NMC who was visiting the Nice office. This

interview revealed a need to re-sequence some of the questions and to provide additional

guiding instructions for the interviewer for when the respondent hadn’t participated in a

particular aspect of the best practices program. With these changes made, the telephone

interview survey could commence.

3.4.4.3 Interview Methodology

The survey was conducted by telephone with senior staff, i.e either the GM or Sales

Director, from twenty eight (28) European and Latin American markets. In total, thirty

one (31) interviews were conducted with thirty six (36) persons. Some interviews had two

or three participants from the same market, e.g. Pakistan and Ukraine. For other markets,

it was possible to interview several persons within the sales organisation including the

General Manager. This was the case for the BENELUX NMC which included Belgium,

Holland and Luxembourg. The interviews were undertaken over a three-month period

from July to September 2002.

Given the large numbers of markets to be interviewed, assistance with the interviewing

was provided by a student working in the best practices team. In total, the student called

Mary Lovelock, undertook 8 of the 31 interviews. The student was a final year Bachelor

of Business student who had had an active involvement in the best practices program.

Additionally, they were researching their own thesis on the subject of ‘Knowledge

Management: importance of people versus technology’. They conducted their interviews


with markets with whom they had an existing relationship in order to leverage the degree

of openness, credibility and trust which comes from this situation. Their involvement in

the study also contributed positively to quality control. This was because having two

researchers undertaking data collection and analysis activities, greatly reduced the

opportunity for systematic bias. Prior to the interviewing phase, guidance was provided

on interviewing technique and the first few interviews were monitored to ensure the

quality of approach.

Telephone interviews typically lasted between 30 and 40 minutes. The length of time

taken for the interview was in direct relationship to the level of survey participant’s

involvement with, and connection to the best practice program. For example, some

participants had had extensive exposure to the program, having participated in a best

practice forum and were a regular visitor to the programs intranet site. At the other end of

the scale, some participants had never attended a forum, read a best practice paper or

looked at the web site.

Throughout the interview, each interviewer applied skills in active listening, reflecting

responses, paraphrasing and probing to encourage a rich and fruitful discussion, and an

accurate understanding of what was disclosed (Seidman 1998). An interview plan was

developed to ensure the quality and consistency of the exchanges, although opportunistic

exploration of issues was allowed. A copy of the survey instrument is provided in

Appendix IX.

The answer collection sheet for the survey was completed during the interview. (A copy of

this document is provided as Appendix IV). After the interview, the hand-written notes on

this sheet were immediately entered into an Excel spreadsheet to aid in analysis, and

impressions were noted in the researchers Personal Log Word document. More

information on the use of the Personal Log is provided in Appendix X)


3.4.4.4 Overview of Processes

The ten key steps involved in the design, communication and conduct of the survey are

summarised in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5: Key Steps in design, communication and implementation of case study

Step Action Comments

1. Objectives clarified for survey with organisation

2 Survey designed with consideration for research questions and client organisation objectives. Survey verified by third party.

Justification for question selection and order is provided in Appendix V. A copy of the survey instrument is provided in Appendix III

3 Communication begins with central organisation by email to inform them of objectives for and timing of survey. Presentations were additionally made at team meetings with same objectives. Central team was asked if they wished to exclude any markets from survey

A list of those markets excluded from survey is provided in Appendix VI

4 Individual meetings held with PMMs and MM’s. Feedback sought on motivation of GM and any market peculiarities/challenges. Draft survey design also explained and discussed.

5 Pilot testing of Survey. Small changes made to sequencing and interview guide as a result of pilot test.

6 Communication commences with NMC’s via email A copy of this initial email is provided in Appendix II.

7 Interviews arranged with those markets responding to email. Telephone follow-up calls are made to all other markets

8 Interviews Conducted by phone. The answer collection sheet for the survey was completed during the interview. After the interview, the hand-written notes were immediately entered into an Excel spreadsheet to aid in analysis and impressions were noted in a Personal log word document. A thank you email was also sent to the survey participant.

More information on the interview methodology is provided in Section IX More information on the Personal Log is provided in Appendix X.

9 Results Analysed All data collected via interviews, observation, from intranet usage statistics and from reports of commitments made and action taken was analysed at this stage.

The process used for analysing the information collected is described in Section 3.3

10 Findings and conclusions documented. Results communicated to central organisation & NMCs


With the process for the conduct of the structured interview now described, it is

appropriate to turn attention to the study’s secondary data sources.

3.4.4.5 Secondary Data Sources

Observations

Best Practice Forums were the main structured face-to-face forum for sharing of best

practices between markets. The forums were run by region. There were four regions with

the Europe Middle East & African and Latin American group. These regions were

• Western Europe (WE)

• Central Eastern & Southern Europe (CESE)

• Middle East and Africa (MEA)

• Latin America (LA)

The forums were facilitated by the researcher who was in an ideal position to observe the

behaviour of participants in discussing, debating and committing to adopt best practices

from other markets. These behaviours indicated at a basic level the willingness of a

Manager to change, and more specifically to consider implementing a practice from

another market.

The researcher recognises that the process of observation during the forums was not

undertaken in a rigorous way as required by standard research methodology (Emory &

Cooper 1991, p. 403). This was because the need to observe behaviour in a structured

way was not recognised as important prior to the conduct of the forum. Accordingly, a

limitation of this approach was that the process did not include pre-thinking or pre-

planning regarding which behaviours to specifically look for, nor was there any systematic

note-taking during the forum. Results from the observation process have therefore been

based on the memory recall of the researcher. The negative impact of the time lag on


memory recall is noted. However, it must be recorded that the researcher did give

consideration to not including their observations as a secondary data source at all. They

changed their mind when they realised that not noting the impact of these observations,

would in itself be a form of bias as it has influenced the way they analysed the results.

Face to Face Interview with Central Staff

Within the central organisation, there were a number of positions which worked directly

with the managers of the markets on a day to day basis. These roles, which included

Product Market Managers (PMMs) and Market Managers (MMs), were in an excellent

position to provide insight into the typical behaviour and motivation of the General

Manager in response to new ideas and challenges in their marketplace. This contextual

interview was extremely valuable to the researchers in testing the framing of the questions

for the interviews with NMCs.

This meeting also provided the opportunity for the PMM or MM to veto some markets’

inclusion in the survey. This action was both practical and politically necessary. This

action impacted the size of the population from which to invite participation in the study –

but was not considered to be significant.

A copy of the questions posed to central staff is provided on the first page of the survey

provided in Appendix III. All notes taken during this meeting were immediately

transposed on to an answer collection sheet which was later entered into an excel

spreadsheet.

A number of secondary data sources were also accessed as a part of the case study. These

sources included:


• Commitment reports which were generated by best practice forums. These

documents captured details of a markets interest in adopting a practice from another

market. Six months after the first best practice forum was held, these documents were

updated to reflect the actions taken, and any problems experienced by the market in

actioning the commitments they made; and

• Intranet usage statistics. All respondents to the survey were asked what was their

typical visitation number to the best practice intranet site. This information was cross

referenced against usage statistics from the intranet. It provided useful information in

terms of the gap between fact and opinion.

3.4.4.6 Summary of Data Collection methods

In summary, four data collection methods were used to collect the data required to answer

the study’s three research questions. The methods selected were guided by the research

on methodological justification. As a part of the selection process, alternative methods

were considered and reasons for their rejection proffered.

The four data gathering methods used are summarised in the Figure 3.4 below. A

discussion of the data analysis and interpretation methods used for this study are presented

in Section 3.5.


Figure 3.4: Overview of data collection methods

3.5 Data Analysis

Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (1999) believe that the during the data interpretation phase,

the researcher is in the greatest danger in terms of logical leaps and false assumptions. It

is therefore important to take a number of actions to ensure the quality of the information

collected.

One of the first actions is that the researcher creates a full record of the interview soon

after its occurrence in order to control bias and to produce reliable data for analysis. To

ensure 100% accuracy of capture of information, a tape recorder was considered for the

telephone interview but rejected. While there are many advantages to using a tape recorder

Primary Data Method

Telephone interview survey

Face to Face interviews with Central Staff

Observations at forums together with commitment reports

Intranet Usage Statistics

Secondary Data Methods

Timeframe 2000 2002


as illustrated in Table 3.5 below, the researchers felt that the overall impact on

interviewees openness would adversely affect reliability.

Table 3.5: Advantages and disadvantages of tape recording the interview

(Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 1999, Easterby-Smith et al 1991, Ghauri et al 1995; Healey and Rawlinson, 1994)

Advantage Disadvantages

• Allows interviewer to concentrate on

questioning and listening

• Allows questions formulated at an

interview to be accurately recorded for

use in later interviews where appropriate

• Can re-listen to the interview

• Accurate and unbiased record provided

• Allows direct quotes to be used

• Permanent record for others to use

• May adversely affect the relationship

between interviewee and interviewer

(possibility of ‘focusing’ on the recorder

• May inhibit some interviewee responses

and reduce reliability

• Possibility of a technical problem

• Disruption to discussion when changing

tapes

• Time required to transcribe the tape

Given that all interviews were not tape recorder, care and attention was paid to accurately

transcribing interviewee comments. Immediately after the interview, these notes were

input into an excel spreadsheet and a Personal Log word document. More details on the

personal log are provided in Appendix X.

After all interviews were completed and all information entered into the various electronic

packages, the responses to each questions were analysed. In the first instance this

involved identifying the number of similar responses to each question. This is what Guba

(1994) calls ‘looking for recurring regularities’. These regularities represent patterns,

which can then be sorted into categories. These categories or themes display internal

and/or external homogeneity. ‘Internal homogeneity’ relates to the extent to which the


data which to a certain category holds together in a meaningful way, while ‘external

homogeneity’ is related to the extent to which differences among categories are bold and

clear. Gall cited in Leedy (1997, pp. 158-166) suggests a similar approach by suggesting

that researchers undertake:

• Interpretational analysis: examining data for constructs, themes and patterns that

explain phenomena;

• Structural Analysis: Searching for patterns in the data with little or no inference as to

the meaning of the pattern; and

• Reflective analysis: using intuition and judgement to evaluate the phenomena.

On this last point Beard and Easingwood (1989, p. 3) make the following interesting

comment that ‘the process of grounded theory development is… a potential quagmire of

subjectivity and intuition.’

Findings from this analysis are discussed in Chapters four, five and six. In the next

section, additional measures employed to ensure the soundness of the case study analysis

will be described.

3.6 Ensuring Case Study Quality

Some of the limitations of case study research as was discussed in Section 3.3.2, relate to

the requirements of research to conform to the constructs of validity and reliability.

Emory and Cooper (1991 p. 180) define ‘validity’ as the extent to which differences found

with a measuring tool reflect true differences among those being tested while Neuman

(1994, p. 127) defines reliability involves a construct giving the same result each time it is

administered. Davidson (2002) is of the opinion that positivist paradigms have elevated

questions of validity and reliability to central importance in research.


It is generally recognised that it is easier to ensure the quality of a quantitative research

approach than a qualitative one. While there are some challenges in achieving this

objective, guidelines and processes have been provided by a number of methodological

experts including Eisenhardt (1989), Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 262), Lincoln and

Guba (1985), Patton (1990), Silverman (1993) and Yin (1994) to aid the researcher here.

Miles and Huberman (1994) proposed a number of criteria to ensure the highest possible

reliability and validity. An explanation of the criteria and an assessment of this study’s

processes against some of this criteria is provided in Table 3.6 below.

Table 3.6: Comparison of Validity and Reliability Criteria

Criteria How achieved in this study

Checking for Researcher Effects

on the Case and vice versa

Having two researchers limited the potential for systematic bias.

Additionally, clear objectives were stated and use of an interview

questionnaire and plan provided a level of control

Triangulation – multiple methods,

multiple investigators, data

triangulation

Triangulation was achieved through the use of different

interviewers and through the use of multiple data collection

methods such as survey, observation and review of intranet

statistics.

Using Extreme Cases Extreme cases were used to analyse the findings. The extreme

cases existed for those markets which had achieved exceptional

levels of knowledge transfer. The researcher was keen to

understand the conditions which created this situation

Getting Feedback from

Informants

The interviewer used paraphrasing during the interview to

confirm that they had understood the point made by the

interviewee, and provided opportunity for additional comments to

be made throughout. Additionally a summary of the major

findings was sent back to all survey respondents, and a

presentation of key findings made to the organisations central

staff.


Yin (1994, p. 3) asserts that construct validity requires use of multiple sources of data with

key informants; internal validity requires pattern matching and explanation building in the

data analysis phase; external validity is facilitated through replication logic in interviews;

and reliability is demonstrated by using a case study protocol and data base in the data

collection phase of the study. Those recommendations referred to by Yin, which were

incorporated in this approach which have not been referred to previously include use of a

database and other electronic tools for capturing all information and impressions.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggest a range of controls to ensure the credibility,

transferability and dependability of the research process. These controls include:

• Using in-depth descriptors which show the complexities of variables and interactions;

• Stating theoretical setting and population parameters;

• Identifying the theoretical parameters of the research;

• Accounting for the changing conditions in the phenomenon under study;

• Accounting for the changes in design which reflect understanding of the setting; and

• Showing the links between the data and the general findings and implications

Eisenhardt (1989) makes a valuable contribution to the discussion by outlining three tests

that can be applied to ensure case study quality. These tests are that the researcher should:

1. Demonstrate strength of method and evidence grounding the theory;

2. Produce good theory which emerges at the end – and not the beginning of the research.

(Good theory as defined by Pfeffer (1982) comprises parsimony, testability and

logical coherence); and

3. Reveal new insights from the new theory.

It is proposed that their overall approach and research outcomes provide clear evidence

that each of these tests have been met for this research project.


Having reviewed the literatures recommendations for steps to ensure quality in a case

study project, the researcher feels confident that they have employed sufficient checks and

balances to ensure the rigor of the processes used in collecting and analysing the data.

Mishler (1991) makes a point worthy of note on the importance of remembering that

qualitative research has as an objective the discovery of human perspectives, thought and

behaviours. Therefore the criteria of trustworthiness is particularly appropriate including :

(1) truth value or credibility, (2) applicability, or transferability, (3) consistency, or

dependability (4) neutrality, or confirmability (Lincoln & Guba 1985; Perry 1999). This

point emphasises the importance of the credibility of the researcher. Further comment in

this area is provided in Section 3.6.1 overleaf.

3.6.1 Credibility of the Researcher

The credibility of the researcher is particularly important in qualitative research projects

(Patton 1990). The investigator is in effect the research instrument, with all the potential

strengths and weaknesses which relate to the application of a research instrument

(Davidson 2002). Sources of error and bias will therefore include predispositions or

prejudices against certain types of ‘data’ and changes in the evaluator as the study

progresses (instrumentation effects), as well as straightforward interpersonal

incompetence.

The principal researcher was a white Australian female with the assistant researcher being

a white, English female. Both researchers recognise the impact that our Anglo-Saxon

socialisation and all the biases inherent within it, may have on the way in which we

interpret the findings from the study, particularly with regard to the impact of culture on

knowledge transfer.


The impact of the researchers’ insider role within the study site on the respondents’

answers needs to be recognised at this stage. There were two factors impacting in this

area. Being well known to the survey respondents, and having been the designers of the

knowledge transfer process, it was recognised that there was potential for respondents to

frame all questions positively so as not to offend the researchers. There was potential

evidence of this in the gap that was observed between how often respondents said they

accessed the intranet and how often the usage statistics indicated that they did. While the

data triangulation method used will help to alleviate this situation, it is recognised that this

potential ‘positive bias’ should be taken into consideration in the review of the study’s

findings.

From a positive perspective, it needs to be noted at this point that the researchers’ deep

knowledge of the organisation, best practices program and close relationship with the

respondents to the survey, allowed them to ask informed follow-up questions during the

interview. This action would have a positive impact on the quality of the data collection

process.

3.7 Ethical Issues

In undertaking research involving human subjects consideration must be given to the

ethical nature of their treatment. Cooper and Emory state that ‘responsible research

anticipates ethical dilemmas and attempts to adjust the design, procedures and protocols

during the planning process rather than treating them as an afterthought (Cooper & Emory

1995, pp. 97-98). Fontana and Frey (1994) comment that when humans are the ‘objects of

inquiry’ in interviewing, extreme care must be taken to ensure that they are free from

harm, either in the form of injury or emotional discomfort.


Those steps taken to protect the respondents to the interview included:

• Inviting participation in the survey, as opposed to mandating it;

• Asking all respondents the same question and treating all respondents in the same

manner throughout the research project;

• Asking for their permission to cite them directly for certain comments that they made;

• Not citing them or making them personally-identifiable for all other comments made;

• Reporting back to them the key findings from the survey.

3.8 Conclusions: Summary Research Questions and Methodology

This Chapter has outlined the research methodology that was applied to enable the

development of responses to the study’s three research questions. More specifically it

justified why a case study approach was adopted, and clearly identified the research

challenges inherent within this type of approach. Some of these challenges related to

ensuring validity and reliability and relate directly to the credibility of the researcher.

With the research methodology described and justified, attention can now be turned to

examining the study’s finding. These are outlined in the following three chapters.

CHAPTER 4 - Results and Discussion - Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer 94

CHAPTER 4 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - MECHANISMS FOR KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

In chapter two, three research questions were identified for further investigation from gaps

in the existing literature on knowledge management. These questions were:




This chapter presents the study’s findings related to the first of the three research

questions, i.e. by what means knowledge is transferred. Chapters Five and Six, report the

results in relation to the other two research questions respectively. Chapter Seven draws

conclusions from this study, compares the findings to previous research outcomes and

describes new models or theories emerging from the findings.

Within the study site for this project, there were three main mechanisms for distributing

best practices across countries. These were:

• Via Documentation. In a written format via a one page best practice summary or

‘snapshot’, and in a more detailed written format, with a case study or ‘How to do it’.

Documentation was distributed in paper format and on CD;

• Via Technology. There were two technological components. These were the

company’s intranet site called OPERA – which had an area dedicated to hosting

documentation on best practices, and a newsletter which was distributed via email

each month. The newsletter summarised all recently posted best practice papers and

had automatic links to OPERA.

• Via face to face channels. The principal face-to-face channel was best practice

forums. Other face to face distribution channels included the Knowledge Manager


describing the practice at a regional meeting or another member of the central team

discussing the practice directly with the NMC.

The findings with the regard to the effectiveness of each of these distribution and

communication channels are outlined in Section 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 respectively as is

illustrated in Figure 4.1 below.

Figure 4.1: Knowledge transfer mechanisms at case study site

4.1 Documentation

Questions one through nine in part one of the questionnaire, relate to the respondents

feedback on the best practices documentation. As a first step, it was established whether

or not the respondent had read the documentation. Then, the next set of questions sought

feedback on the quality and usability of the best practices documentation. The

respondents’ responses are summarised in Table 4.1 below.

Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer at Study Site

Documentation

Section 4.1

Technology

Section 4.2

Face to Face

Section 4.3


Table 4.1: Summary of respondents’ feedback on best practice documentation

Response Read Snapshot ?

Read How-to-do it?

Easy to Read?

Content Useful ?

Enough to Implement?

No % No % No % No % No %

Yes 17 61% 16 57% 15 87% 16 94% 16 94%

No 11 39% 12 43% 2 13% 1 6% 1 6%

TOTAL 28 28 17 17 17

As shown in Table 4.1, around 60% of respondents had read at least one of the documents.

Of this population, there was widespread agreement that the documentation was easy to

read, with useful content, and with enough detail to implement. These points are reflected

in the following comments from interviewees:

‘The documents were excellent…’ (MEA - 22)

‘Light, basic, easy to implement with the right level of detail’ (CESE - 12)

‘Liked the NMC context area and the Do’s and Don’ts’ (CESE - 25)

‘Liked the fact that they provided contact details’ (WE - 21)

‘Are very detailed…was perfect’ (WE - 2)

‘Liked the fact that you could read the snapshot to get a feel for the paper and then make

the decision as to whether or not to read the ‘how to do it.’ (WE – 10)

One market made an interesting comment about reading a best practice paper on paper

versus on the screen:

‘Written documentation is essential, as it is easier to share. I prefer reading a paper

document to an electronic one on my notebook. However written documentation does not

replace face-to-face knowledge sharing’ (MEA – 22)

While the negative comments about the documentation were in the minority, the feedback

in this area and suggestions for improvement, were very note worthy. Some of these

comments related to language, with the use of English clearly being an issue for some


markets. One respondent from a French speaking market (MEA - 24), commented that the

documents were too difficult to read and he would have preferred them to have been

written in French. One respondent from a Spanish speaking market had already taken

steps to have the best practices presented in Spanish at local team meetings. They

commented that while their English was at a level sufficient for understanding the

documentation in English, they knew that this was not the case for their staff (LA – 1).

Translation into Spanish would therefore be appreciated. This point was supported by

another Latin American NMC (LA - 8) who commented that while she could understand

the practice in English, it was much easier for her in Spanish. Another respondent

commented that the level of English used, was simply ‘too complex’, and another

remarked that they would like the ‘how-to-do-it’ papers to be ‘less long-winded’. These

comments were particularly interesting in light of the fact that special attention had been

directed to writing the papers with simple English.

Another observation from the survey related to a markets desire to chose papers to review

based on perceived similarities between markets. Three markets commented that when

looking at the best practices it was important to choose those papers from markets very

similar to their own in terms of maturity, size and culture. These points are illustrated in

the following comments:

‘How mature the market is of the best practice, determines its relevance to us’ (WE

– 26)

‘Because of our unique environment, many of the practices are not so useful’

(MEA – 16)

‘I couldn’t relate to the practices from Brazil and Argentina because their markets

were too big’ (MEA – 9)

These factors which clearly impact on the effectiveness of knowledge transfer will be

discussed in Chapter Five.


4.1.1 Most popular papers

All interviewees were asked which papers were of most interest to them. Summaries of

responses in this area are provided in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2: Summary of Most Popular Best Practice Papers

Market Paper Which markets? Number expressing interest

Scandinavia Manage Key accounts effectively Greece, Turkey, Ghana, Belgium, Finland, Germany

6

Switzerland Developing effective marketing actions around customer segments

Greece, Argentina, Ghana, Germany, South Africa

5

Caribbean & Central America

Convert Sabre customers through a high quality blitz

CWA, BENELUX, South Africa

3

Caribbean & Central America

Save at risk customers through a pro-active customer service blitz

Greece, Morocco, South Africa

3

Brazil Acquire a top customer through partnership

Argentina, CWA, Scandinavia

3

Italy Optimise your participation at a trade fair Greece, Turkey 2

Austria Cost effective and creative communication activities for a successful product launch

Greece, Ghana 2

Ghana How to effectively enter a new market through a SWOT analysis

Malta, CWA, 2

Argentina Acquire a major account by uncovering real needs

CWA, Ghana 2

SCANDINAVIA

Locking in your customers through development funding

Finland 1

UK Client conversion Program Scandinavia 1

Argentina Cost effective way to serve customers through E-Learning

Belgium 1

Croatia Increase customer share through needs assessment

Belgium 1

Belgium Using a consolidator customer as a reseller of Pro-web for mutual gain

Argentina 1


As shown in Table 4.2, the two most popular papers came from Western Europe and from

two mature markets. The Scandinavian experience in managing key accounts was the

most popular paper with the Swiss, Marketing Strategy being the second most popular.

Those markets interested in these practices came from across all regions.

4.1.2 Support Requirements in Implementing Best Practices

Questions 10, 11, and 12 in the questionnaire then asked survey respondents if they

needed any additional support such as people, budget or more information to implement

any of the best practices that they had expressed interest in. Six markets indicated that

they would need further assistance in terms of people and/or budget, with seven markets

requesting more information. Responses to these questions are provided in Table 4.3

below.

Table 4.3: Additional support requirements for implementation by market

Additional Support Type Markets Number

People or Budget ? CIS, CWA, Ghana, Malta, Peru, Netherlands 6

More information ? CIS, CWA, Ghana, Malta, Peru, Pakistan, Greece 7

It is worth noting from Table 4.3, that requests for support generally came from the

smallest and least mature markets. These markets would have fewer resources than their

larger counterparts. In terms of anything else that could be provided to support the markets

in implementing the practice i.e. Question 12, one interviewee responded as follows:

‘We need more frequent meetings…to discuss practices’ (LA - 19)

These comments will also be revisited in Chapter Five when factors impacting on

knowledge transfer are examined.


4.2 Technology

There were two data sources accessed for exploring the impact of technology on

knowledge distribution at the study site. These were intranet usage statistics together with

feedback from the questionnaire. Two separate elements of the technology strategy were

examined. These were the intranet site within ‘OPERA’, and the monthly electronic

newsletter. These findings are discussed in sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 respectively.

4.2.1 Intranet Site in OPERA

Part two of the questionnaire specifically sought feedback on the effectiveness of the

company’s intranet, ‘Opera’. Questions 14 through 18 covered areas including:

• Ease of Access

• Effectiveness of intranet as a communication and distribution mechanism

• Frequency of Access

This information was combined with and compared to information obtained directly from

the statistical reports from the intranet.

Table 4.4 indicates that most respondents, i.e. 68%, thought that that intranet was an

effective way to communicate best practices, although the current technology did not

make it easy to access with only 36% of respondents saying that it was easy to access.

Three respondents commented that they were unable to access the site altogether.


4.2.1.1 Ease of Access and Effectiveness

Table 4.4: Summary of responses: easy of access and effectiveness of intranet

Response Easy to Access Is Effective

Yes 10 36% 19 68%

Yes/But 4 14%

No 9 32% 8 - (3 couldn't get in)

29%

N/A 5 18% 1 3%

Total 28 100 % 28 100 %

Some of the comments made by respondents about the intranet were as follows:

‘Is a logical tool’ (MEA – 22)

‘Is a most effective communication tool that helps streamline the information flow and

provides benchmarking options and awareness to changes happening in different parts of

the world. In times of globalization this tool is what we need to have’. (CESE – 12)

‘Normally OPERA should be the perfect instrument. But I am always disappointed (speed/access)’ (WE – 2)

4.2.1.2 Frequency of Access From the survey, forty percent of respondents i.e. 11 persons indicated that they accessed

the intranet on a regular basis, i.e. weekly or monthly. A review of monthly intranet

statistics from October 2001 until July 2003 revealed that regular access to the site was

actually lower than that reported at 25%. This gap between fact and opinion could be

attributed to an honest perception that they do access the site more frequently than they

do, or from a desire to please the interviewer. Comments on the potential impact of bias

resulting from the survey respondents knowing the interviewer have already been made in

Chapter Three is this area.


Table 4.5: Summary of Access frequency for Intranet

Frequency of Access No Percentage No Percentage

Questionnaire Intranet Stats

Monthly/Weekly 11 40% 7 25%

Occasionally 11 40% 8 29%

Never 4 14% 11 39%

N/A` 2 7% 2 7%

TOTAL 28 100% 28 100%

The 20% of respondents who had not yet looked at the intranet provided reasons

including:

• ‘I’m new - not done it yet’ (MEA – 9)

• ‘Too busy’ (LA –5 & WE – 26)

• ‘Don’t read info on PC’ (WE – 3)

These factors are of interest and clearly need to be taken into consideration in the design

of a distribution and communication strategy.

The intranet statistics revealed that the top four markets accessing the site, (by a long way)

were:

1. Finland – (WE)

2. Argentina – (LA)

3. Pakistan – (MEA)

4. Malta – (CESE)

Clearly some markets have better speed of access and/or are more comfortable with this

form of knowledge transfer than others.


4.2.2 Newsletter

Questions 19 and 20 sought feedback on the effectiveness of the monthly electronic

newsletter as a communication tool. Question nineteen checked to see that the respondent

did actually receive the newsletter. Eight Two percent i.e. 25 of all respondents, received

the monthly newsletter, fourteen percent (4) did not, (and were subsequently added to the

mailing list) and one respondent received it, but never read it. These points are presented

in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6: Summary of those markets receiving and reading monthly newsletter

Category Number Percentage

Received newsletter and read it 23 82%

Did not receive newsletter 4 14%

Received newsletter but did not read it 1 4%

TOTAL 28 100%

Comments about the newsletter were generally positive as is reflected in the following

remark:

‘Like the fact that we filter info through our newsletter’ (MEA – 22)

4.2.3 Improvements to Technology

Question 18 sought feedback on how OPERA could be improved. Respondents provided

feedback on the monthly newsletter and documentation at the same time. This feedback is

interesting because it highlights those factors which make a technology distribution and

communication channel more effective. A summary of the main recommendations, are

provided in Table 4.7 overleaf.


Table 4.7: Summary of Recommendations relating to use of technology

Ref How to Improve OPERA - including comments on Newsletters and Best Practice Papers

No of responses

1 Faster Access times 7

2 Translation of materials - Spanish/French 5

3 Not aware of search engine - more promotion required. 5

4 Want email flashes - announcements when new articles published - to be sent by email 3

5 Fewer clicks to get to the information you need/ Subject title must be very clear to minimize clicking

2

6 Need to update more regularly 1

7 Quicker document downloading 1

8 Obtain more content 1

9 More promotion around the articles/practices - include testimonials from other market 1

10 Include quotes/testimonials in articles - covering what they did - what it did for them - how other NMC's can use this practice

1

11 Beginning of How to do its - must have 'more selling' - about the value of the practice 1

Question Twenty Two, sought respondents feedback on potential new services for the

future. These services included

• Creation of on-line chat groups

• Provision of more sales tools and guidelines

• Benchmarking – Best practices from other organisations

While there was a level of interest in on-line chat groups (seven respondents expressed

interest), there was a level of hesitancy with regard to this new forum as is reflected in the

following comment.

‘There must be a driver for the (online) conversations (to work well)’ (MEA – 7)


There was also a level of interest expressed in providing more best-practice sales tools

with nine interviewees responding in the affirmative. There were however some caveats to

these affirmations as reflected in the following comments:

‘We need more tools tailored for smaller NMCs (CESE - 27)

‘We need the tools to be simpler’ (LA – 19)

While five markets expressed a positive interest in external benchmarking, three markets

specifically commented that the value was limited. The reasons for this belief can be

identified in the following comments:

‘ ..it is too difficult to adapt them to our (GDS) environment’ (MEA – 7)

‘..only if they are simple..’ (CESE – 15)

Issues clearly exist with regard to the adaptability and/or transferability of practices from

other business environments into their local business context.

A summary of all responses to questions on new technology are outlined in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8: Summary of responses to questions re new technological services

Question Yes Yes but No No response

No % No % No % No %

On-line Chat Groups 7 25 1 3.5 1 3.5 19 68

More Sales Tools 9 32 3 11 0 0 16 57

External Benchmarking 5 18 1 3.5 3 11 19 68

As shown in Table 4.8, there was a high level of non-responses. This occurred because

the researcher did not ask the question as opposed to receiving no response from the

interviewee. The decision not to ask these questions occurred if the respondent had had

either low involvement in the program to date, or had experience difficulties with


accessing existing technology. It was therefore deemed not appropriate to continue with

this line of questions.

4.3 Face-to-Mechanisms

Questions 23, 24, 32, and 33 explored :

• How interviewees heard about best practices from other markets

• How they would like to hear about them in the future

• With which markets they would be most interested in exchanging experiences; and

• How we should run best practice forums in the future.

4.3.1 How Interviewees heard about Best Practices from Other Markets

Table 4.9 below, summarises the responses to the first of these questions.

Table 4.9: How they heard about Best Practices

Communication Channels Mechanism How did you hear about BPS ?

No

%

BP Forums Face 18 21

Opera Intranet Technology 16 19

Annual meeting of all NMCs Face 12 14

PMM/MM – via central staff Face 12 14

Newsletters Technology 8 10

No response 6 7

From Knowledge Manager Face 5 6

Other NMCs Face 3 4

Through Sales consultancies Face 2 2

Best Practices Booklet Documentation 2 2

Total number of replies 84 100%


Many respondents indicated multiple channels. Face-to-face knowledge mechanisms are

rated as the most effective communication channel with 62% or respondents identifying a

face-to-face mechanism as the way by which they heard about best practices from other

markets. The most frequently cited face-to-face communication channel was the best

practice forum. Their popularity is clearly evidenced in respondents’ comments:

‘The most effective way of sharing best practices is through face to face

mechanisms…Forums are a good way to brainstorm new ideas’ (MEA – 13)

‘Why are there not more best practice forums now…There is too much talking now at

NMC meetings and not enough sharing of experiences’ (CESE – 25)

‘We want more meetings - more opportunities to share experiences with other NMCs’ (LA

– 19)

‘I learn a lot about other markets from best practice forums. When Gonzola and Maria are

talking - my brain is working/ticking - thinking what can I apply’ (LA – 8)

4.3.2 How they would like to hear about best practices in the future

Table 4.10 shows the preferences expressed for how interviewees wished to hear about

best practices.

Table 4.10: How they would like to hear about Best Practices in the future

Communication Channels Mechanism What are your preferred ways to hear about BPS?

Nos

%

Face to Face Sharing Face 11 30

BP Forums Face 8 22

No response 7 19

Opera Intranet Technology 4 11

CD Documentation 2 6

Best Practices Booklet Documentation 1 4

Newsletters Technology 1 3

From Knowledge Manager Face 1 3

Videoconference Face/Technology 1 3

Total Number of Responses 36 100%


Taking all face-to-face knowledge sharing mechanisms together, 58% of respondents

indicated that they would prefer to hear about best practices in the future through these

types of channels. One respondent highlighted this point by commenting that ‘direct

sharing is the most important.’ Another commented that the best way for them to learn

about other practices, is to physically visit the market. They had done this with their

entire senior management team.

An interesting point was made about the limitations of technology with two respondents

putting caveats on their comments about OPERA by saying that this was a good

mechanism ‘if it works’.

4.3.3 Best Practice Forums

From 2000 until 2002, best practice forums were run by region within the markets of

Western Europe, Latin America, etc. This was done so that forums could be combined

with twice yearly regional meetings, thus achieving objectives of convenience and cost

effectiveness. Additionally it was recognised that these communities of markets often had

similarities in terms of language, culture, competitive environment and level of market

maturity. Within the questionnaire, the effectiveness of the current model for sharing best

practices was evaluated, and new models for the future were proposed. As shown in

Table 4.11 below, the current arrangement of running best practice forums by region is

very popular as is evidenced by the 86% of respondents who said yes.

Table 4.11: How forums should be run in the future

Run forums by Region Same competitive position

Similar problems to solve

Yes 24 86% 25 89% 25 89%

No 1 4% 1 4% 1 4%

N/A or don't know** 3 11% 2 7% 2 7%

TOTAL 28 100 % 28 100 % 28 100 %

Markets saying no South Africa

Malta Malta


In fact, several markets within Latin America specifically commented that they would feel

uncomfortable sharing practices with other regions as is evidenced in the following

comments:

‘I would not feel comfortable sharing with Africa and Europe.’ (LA – 8)

‘LA is not as advanced as Europe.’ (LA – 18)

These responses reflect a higher level of group affiliation and cohesion within the Latin

American region. The researcher observed behaviours during the best practice forums that

led her to make this assessment. These behaviours included higher levels of informal

contact.

While the current model for sharing best practices by region is clearly popular, other

models were also considered of value with sharing of practices with markets in a similar

competitive position and with similar problems to solve, also rating highly at 89%

respectively. Question 32 in the survey asked NMC’s which markets they would like to

share best practices with. Table 4.12 below outlines their responses.


Table 4.12: Which markets would like to share with which markets

Region These markets like to share with these markets

MEA

Morocco Pakistan South Africa Tunisia Zimbabwe Ghana Egypt Israel

Tunisia MEA Australia and some European markets, US Morocco MEA MEA & LA Saudi, Yemen, UAE, QATAR Other NMCs with same environment and size

CESE

Greece CIS Malta Poland Turkey Ukraine

Don’t know about what others are doing to make that judgement

Russia, Ukraine, Turkey Western Europe - Plus neighbours with translation CESE Hungary - other countries with same culture Russia, Romania, Turkey

WE

Austria Germany

BENELUX UK Scandinavia Italy Finland

Same sized NMC with similar problems Scandinavia, Switzerland, Austria - similar culture,

market size and position Most mature markets US - (but with care) Home markets, i.e. Germany, France, Spain UK Scandinavian markets and others with the same

problems LA

Argentina Paraguay Ecuador Peru Brazil Caribbean

Markets with same business reality LA LA LA US LA - and those with same business reality

Several note worthy findings emerge from question thirty-two. Firstly, the point made

earlier about the high comfort level the Latin American markets feel sharing practices

within their region is reinforced in these results with four of the six markets surveyed

saying they would like to share practices within their region

Within the MEA region, two of the eight markets surveyed said they would like to share

within the region, with an additional NMC indicating that they would like to share not

only within MEA, but also with LA. Morocco and Tunisia were very specific in terms of


their preferences for knowledge sharing, with each indicating the other as their preferred

market for sharing experiences. These two markets are nearly identical in terms of market

position, competitive environment. culture and language. The Egyptian market was also

specific in terms of those markets they wished to share with identifying other Arabic

countries including Saudi, QATAR, Yemen and the UAE. The clear exception to the

trend was South Africa who indicated that they would gain the most value by sharing with

markets with the same business culture. These markets were outside of their region and

included Australia and several Western European markets.

Within the CESE region, four of the six markets surveyed identified their region or several

markets within the region as those with whom they would get most value out of sharing

best practices with. Malta was an exception to the trend indicating that they would obtain

more value sharing with countries in Western Europe. The Greek NMC showed a

willingness to consider practices from other markets but commented that lack of visibility

on operations within these markets, made it difficult for them to assess, which markets

would be of most value.

Within the Western European region, five of the seven markets surveyed identified

countries within their region to share with. Two interesting exceptions included the UK

market, which indicated that they would like to share with the US. (It is important to note

at this juncture that the survey respondent from the UK was American). The other

exception was Austria who indicated that the most value for them could be obtained from

sharing with markets with the same problems. These markets could exist within their

region, or in other regions.

These findings with regard to the impact of cultural comfort zones, market maturity, and

relative competitive position will be revisited in the next Chapter, when factors impacting

upon knowledge transfer across countries and cultures are considered.

CHAPTER 5 - Results and Discussion – Factors impacting on Knowledge Transfer 112

CHAPTER 5 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION – FACTORS IMPACTING ON KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

The second research question identified from gaps in the literature was – What factors

impact on knowledge transfer within an organisational setting?

In Chapter 2, many factors were identified as having an impact on the effectiveness of any

knowledge transfer process. These factors could be related to the type of knowledge being

transferred, systems and conditions within the organisation itself, external market factors

or directly to the individual. These many factors are illustrated in Figure 5.1 below.

Figure 5.1: Factors Impacting on Knowledge Transfer

Organisational Factors

Design of transfer system

Knowledge Itself Individual Factors

National Culture


Multiple Channels

Senior Mgt Support

Technology

Push & Pull Factors

Nature of Knowledge

Learning Styles

Fear of Change

Psycho Social Filter & trust

issues

Status

Motivation

Absorptive Capacity

External Factors

Market Conditions


Several factors impacting on knowledge transfer have already emerged from the study’s

findings in Chapter Four. These factors related to culture, market maturity, and relative

competitive position. These will be explored in greater detail within this chapter, along

with other factors identified in Table 5.1.

Three data sources were accessed to obtain information relevant to this research question.

These sources were the :

Survey questionnaire.

Observations at Best Practice Forums.

Commitment Sheets from Best Practice Forums.

Feedback from interviews with staff in the central organisation.

Those questions within the survey questionnaire that directly sought feedback relevant to

this question are outlined in Table 5.1 below:

Table 5.1: Summary of questions used to gather information for Question 2

Questions No Question Objectives

8 & 9 Which practices were you particularly interested in

and Why?

Highlights the criteria that

respondents use when looking to

accept or reject a best practice

10,11 & 12 What additional support could be provided to help

you to implement the practice i.e. people, budget,

information or anything else ?

Identify whether lack or

resources i.e absorptive capacity

is an issue in transfer

15 & 16 Do you find OPERA easy to access ?

Any problems implementing Digital Certificates,

i.e. security wall?

Determine whether technology is

a barrier or enabler

32 From which markets are you most interested in

exchanging experiences ?

Demonstrate openness to other

environments and barriers in

terms of culture etc


5.1 Nature of Knowledge being transferred

The nature of knowledge being transferred related to sales and marketing processes and

was of varying levels of complexity. The knowledge was therefore both explicit and tacit.

Therefore, while a lot of the knowledge could be captured in documentation such as best

practice papers, the human factor in communication was important for tacit knowledge

transfer.

5.2 Design of Knowledge Transfer System

The design of the knowledge transfer system itself has an impact on the effectiveness of

knowledge transfer processes. Within the study site, different channels were created to

identify and capture both tacit and explicit knowledge, and a research process was

developed to convert tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge so that it could be recorded in

best practice documentation. These channels within the knowledge management process

at the study site are represented in Table 5.2 below.

Table 5.2: Multi-channel knowledge management process at study site

STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 STAGE 5

Identification Documentation Sharing & Distribution

Pushing for implementation

Measuring impact

HOW By WHO HOW HOW HOW

• Best Practice Forums

• Open invitation to share BPs

• Sales Consultancies

• Knowledge Manager

• GMs and Sales Managers

• Other NMC staff

• Intranet

• Email

• BP forums

• CD

• KM sharing practices

• Other central staff sharing practices – i.e. PMM or MM

• Stage 1 of Best Practice forums


• Measuring financial results

• In depth telephone survey

Knowledge Management Process


From the feedback received via the survey, it is known that all channels for knowledge

transfer were well received. While many respondents commented that face-to-face

mechanisms were the most effective for knowledge transfer, they added that they still

needed documentation of knowledge via best practice papers as a support tool for

implementation. One respondent commented that they didn’t care ‘..how they heard about

the best practice, as long as they heard about it’ (CESE – 20)

5.2.1 Design of Best Practice Forums

Best Practice forums are a key and highly visible element of the best practice transfer

program. The forums themselves have an in-built ‘push’ mechanism to encourage the

transfer of best practices. This push mechanism has two key elements.

Firstly all participants at the forum are invited to publicly commit to implementing a new

sales or marketing practice within their market. After the forum a report listing all

commitments made is sent to the Vice-President of the EMEA LA group.

Six months later, all participants attend Stage Two of the best practice forum where they

report on how they went in actioning their commitments. Where commitments aren’t

actioned, participants are asked to comment on barriers they encountered.

The process uses as a driver, peer pressure with all participants being motivated to be well

perceived or regarded by their colleagues and the Vice-President. This factor drives both

the commitment process and the degree of implementation achieved. The outcomes from

the commitment process are discussed in greater detail in Chapter Six, Indicators of

Knowledge Transfer across countries and culture.


5.3 National Culture

Findings on the impact of culture on knowledge transfer were drawn from three sources

including the survey, commitment sheets from best practice forums, and from the

researcher’s observations at forums.

Several questions within the survey elicited information on the impact of culture on

knowledge transfer. In Question 8, participants were asked which practices from other

markets they were interested in. Table 4.2, which reported the responses from this

question, showed that some markets were interested in adopting practices from different

countries and cultures. However, the overall numbers expressing interest were relatively

low. In the discussions that ensued in the interviews around this question, culture was

often cited as a key reason, why one market was not able to implement practices from

another country and culture. One respondent commented that:

‘Practices from my region, or from countries with the same culture such as Italy, Spain or

Greece, are the most easily adoptable. We could not for example adopt the Scandinavian

key account management process because it is not culturally appropriate’ (CESE – 25)

A similar point was made within the Western European region. The Scandinavian market

composes six countries including Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Estonia, Latvia and

Lithuania. The survey respondent from this market, commented that the cultural

adaptation of sales practices was even required within their own markets, which had a

degree of cultural homogeneity. They cited the existence of a sales incentive scheme in

Sweden and not in Norway, to illustrate this point.

The need for a level of cultural familiarity or synchronicity in knowledge transfer was also

evident in the reporting of findings to question 32 as to which markets NMC’s would like

to share experiences with. These findings were reported in Chapter Four in Table 4.12. It

was evident that markets would nearly always choose to share experiences with a market

with which they shared similar cultural characteristics.


As the facilitator of the Best Practice forums, the researcher was well placed to observe

each participant’s interest in practices from other markets during discussions. All

participants had to declare whether each best practice presented could be adopted within

their market, adopted with a level of adaptation or would have to be rejected offering

reasons for their decision. In this process, some markets showed a reluctance to consider

practices from other markets citing cultural context reasons. While some practices clearly

are more difficult to transfer than others for cultural context reasons, the researcher felt

that culture was sometimes offered as a reason for rejection, when the ‘real reason’ for

rejection was more related to the personal credibility of the person owning the best

practice. More on this point is provided in Section 5.10, Psycho-Social filters.

5.4 Degree of Similarity in Competitive Conditions and Market Maturity

The impact of cultural similarity on knowledge transfer was discussed in Section 5.3

above. A similar factor impacting on knowledge transfer relates to the likeness of market

conditions in terms of competitiveness and maturity. In responding to questions about the

future format of best practice forums, survey respondents clearly indicated a desire to

share with markets with a similar competitive environment and with a similar level of

market maturity. Evidently, the closer the characteristics between markets, the more

feasible are the transfer of best practices between them. A summary of the characteristics

in each of the four regions, is provided overleaf in Table 5.3. These similarities include

language, culture, market maturity, and competitive position. Table 5.3 shows that the

Latin American region has the highest level of common characteristics.


Table 5.3: Characteristics of each geographic region

Western Europe Central and Easter Europe

Middle East & Africa Latin America

• No common language

• European culture • Democratic govt • High level of

technical market sophistication

• Mature markets

• No common language

• Similarity in Govt environment. – in some markets

• Growing market • Fewer competitors

• Nearly a common language – Arabic for ME & English or French for Africa

• Less sophisticated markets with exception of South Africa and Israel

• Common language – ex Brazil

• Latin Culture • Common

competitive environment

• Mixed level of technical market sophistication

5.5 Technology

Technology clearly has an impact on knowledge transfer. There are two aspects to

consider here: firstly, the issue of technical infrastructure and capacity. Several countries

including Ghana, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Puerto Rica (Caribbean) reported

inadequate telecommunications infrastructure to support the efficient use of the intranet to

access best practices. Two markets indicated that they needed to be in the office at

midnight in order to experience an acceptable response time. Additionally, the intranet

site itself had experienced a number of problems with regard to security and access. This

had made access for all respondents occasionally difficult, with the resulting impact that

they were reluctant to visit the site again. This reality is evident in the feedback with only

36% of respondents indicating that the site was easy to access, and 46% saying that it

wasn’t easy to access. The most common recommendation for improvement was that the

site develop faster access times.

A second issue impacting on the effectiveness of the intranet site was related to the

respondents comfort with and inclination for, exploring an intranet site to find

information. A telling factor was that eighteen percent of respondent had never visited

the site. As a general rule, visitors to the site want to be able to find what they are

looking for quickly with a minimum of keystrokes. This fact was evident in the feedback


that was received with regard to how the site could be improved. Several respondents

commented that we should more actively promote the search engine, so that people knew

how to quickly find the information that they were seeking more quickly. Additionally it

was recommended that the site should be modified so that fewer clicks were needed to

find the information that was needed. Feedback was also received on the importance of

making subject titles very clear so that people could be sure of what they would find

‘under the click’.

Two respondents indicated a complete lack of interest in accessing any information via the

intranet. This factor could be attributed to a lack of comfort with this relatively modern

form of information sourcing.

5.6 Language

All documentation within the intranet, and all best practice forums are in English in

accordance with organisational policy. The use of English, which is a second language for

most respondents clearly impacts on the effectiveness of knowledge transfer processes.

This is evidenced by the finding that five respondents to the survey indicated that they it

would be more helpful for them if documentation was in their own language.

5.7 Absorptive Capacity

Two data sources were used to explore the issue of absorptive capacity. These were the

commitment reports from best practice forums and several questions from within the

survey. (Questions 10, 11 and 12 in the survey explored whether lack of resources was a

factor impacting on knowledge transfer).

During stage two of the best practice forums, participants reported on their success in

implementing practices from other markets. Reasons given for non-implementation


sometimes included a lack of capacity to implement new initiatives given existing projects

and priorities.

Responses from the survey also indicated that lack of resources was a barrier to

implementing practices from other markets. Six markets indicated that they would need

extra assistance to implement best practices in terms of people resources or budget. These

responses were from the smaller NMCs with fewer resources at their disposal. One

respondent commented that it was important that the commitment process at best practice

forums occurred before the annual budget submission process, so that sufficient resources

could be requested.

5.8 Motivation, Market Forces and Organisational Culture

Individual motivation is an important element to consider when examining factors

impacting upon knowledge transfer. Motivation is an element which is both intrinsic to an

individual, but which is also affected by external factors such as market forces and

organisation culture. Several data sources were used to obtain information on motivation.

These included interviews with staff in the central organisation, the observations of the

researcher and commitment sheets from, best practice forums, and from questions in the

survey.

Feedback from central staff indicated that most survey respondents were perceived to be

either motivated or very motivated. This finding is perhaps not surprising given the

seniority of the roles surveyed. These findings are summarised overleaf in Table 5.4.


Table 5.4: Perceived level of motivation of survey respondents

Degree of Motivation No %

Motivated 12 43%

Very Motivated 15 54%

Don’t Know 1 3%

TOTAL 28 100%

What was particularly interesting about the impact of motivation were comments or

caveats made by the central staff when giving their assessments in this area. Several of

these comments reflected a level of tension or resistance between the NMC and the central

organisation, and a strong desire on behalf of the General Manager (GM) or Sales

Director, to ‘manage their own show’. The point being made here that while the GM may

be motivated to bring about change, they would often prefer to be the ‘sole drivers’ of the

new initiative with no advice or assistance being taken from the central organisation or

other NMCs’. This human characteristic or personality trait to want to do things ‘my way’

has previously been reported in the literature by Leonard (1998) and must be taken into

consideration in the design of organisational push and pull processes. This human

tendency could explain the quote by a Manager from Xerox cited in Chapter two that,

‘You would think that these better practices would spread like wildfire to the entire

organisation. They don’t (Senior Vice President, Xerox, cited in O’Dell & Jackson

Grayson 2001, p. 1)

The transfer process clearly needs to be designed to give the receiver opportunity to

customise the practice to make it ‘my own’. This tension factor between the central

organisation and the NMC’s provides some insight into one aspect of the organisation’s

culture, which must be considered when examining factors impacting on knowledge

transfer.


The relative strength of an NMC’s market position also impacts on the motivation of the

General Manager, and subsequently on their openness to considering practices from other

markets. Some markets within EMEA LA enjoy a 100% market share, while others are

fighting for survival. There is a clear evidence of a relationship between the willingness

of a market to consider a practice from another market and the level of security and

stability that they are currently experiencing in their market. This point will be discussed

further in Chapter Six and Seven when the findings related to indicators of knowledge

transfer are presented and discussed.

5.9 Experience of Change/ Fear of Change

A further point related to market conditions, is concerned with experience of, and fear in

managing change. This wasn’t an area where information was specifically sought through

the data collection process. However in reviewing comments made by interviewees,

together with the researcher’s own knowledge of the respondents, some interesting

impressions and findings emerged. One of these related to the respondents experience of

change. Some General Managers and markets have clearly experienced more change than

others both at a personal and country level. This fact is apparent in the fact that a GM of

one cultural origin is working in a different country. The Ghanaian GM who is Danish,

The Greek GM who is Spanish and the South African GM who is German, are good

examples. These individuals clearly have experience of change as they have been

operating outside their own cultural frame of reference. There are several individual

examples in this category. It is the researcher’s assessment that these individuals appeared

to be more willing and open to ideas from outside their own cultural reference than those

GM’s whose life experiences had been limited to their own country or cultural

environment.

Another note worthy point about change already referred to in section 5.8, relates to the

impact of market conditions and more importantly market volatility. There is clear

evidence that in those markets where business survival is an ongoing struggle as is the


case in Argentina and Israel, the General Manager is forced to look for a broad range of

solutions if they are to survive. This is the Darwinian model of change as is reflected in

the following anthropological quote:

‘It is not the strongest of the species which survive, nor the most intelligent, but

the ones most responsive to change’ (Charles Darwin, 1839)

5.10 Psycho-Social Filter

How one person is perceived by their colleagues, in terms of status, intelligence and

personal credibility, has a direct impact upon the knowledge transference process.

Personal credibility is directly influenced by an assessment of their competence and is also

a function of the closeness of the relationship between the two parties. Andrews (2000)

described the filtering impact of these phenomena on receiving and sharing knowledge in

terms of a psycho-social filter.

From the researcher’s observations of the group processes within best practice forums, it

was clear that some participants were assessing/evaluating all practices presented by other

market’s through their personal psycho-social filter. An example of this was observed

when a practice from another market was rejected for ‘cultural reasons’. In this case the

researcher had the distinct impression from the body language and tone of voice of the

market rejecting the practice that the real reason for rejection, was the perceived

credibility of the market presenting the practice.

Having reviewed the findings with regard to factors mediating the knowledge transfer

process, attention will now turn to examining the findings with regard to indictors of

knowledge transfer. These findings are outlined in Chapter Six.

CHAPTER 6 - Results and Discussion – Indicators of Knowledge Transfer 124

CHAPTER 6 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION – INDICATORS OF KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

The third research question identified from gaps in the literature was – What are the

indicators of knowledge transfer within an organisational setting?

The data sources used for obtaining information related to this research question were

drawn from the:

• structured interview, (Questions 26 to 31 of the questionnaire related directly to this

research question);

• commitment sheets from best practice forums;

• feedback from staff in the central organisation; and

• observations from best practice forums.

The presentation of findings with regard to this research question is organised in two

sections. The first section looks at evidence of knowledge transfer as reported by the

NMCs’ through the best practice forum process. This evidence includes both actions

taken and results achieved.

The second section looks at evidence or other indicators of a change in behaviour or

attitude with regard to adopting practices from other markets.

6.1 Findings from Best Practice Forum commitment process

This section looks for evidence and indicators of knowledge transfer through the best

practice forum process. This process asks participants to make commitments to introduce


a new practice, and then to report on their relative success in implementing the practice six

months later.

6.1.1 Evidence of Positive Attitude at the Planning Stage

While not a measure of knowledge transfer itself, a willingness to try to adopt a practice

from another market is a clear initial indicator that a transfer process may be about to

commence. The commitment sheets from the best practice forums provide initial evidence

of a positive attitude in this regard.

From a review of the commitments made, it is clear that some markets are more positively

disposed to adopting from other markets as can be evidenced by both the number and

complexity of practices targeted for adoption. As you can see from Table 6.1, the

Egyptian market committed to introducing two changes while the Israeli market

committed to making ten changes.

Table 6.1: Examples of commitments made by two markets in MEA

NMC Action Items Egypt 1. Will conduct a market segmentation by sales categories A,B,C & D Israel 1. Conduct a NMC launch (official inauguration) – 200 travel agents – (same idea as Top

Travel Awards gala) 2. Introduce top travel agents awards for categories such as travel agent employee of the

month 3. Identify key decision makers in prospects 4. Have an NMC Open Door demo for a day – provide lunch/run product demos 5. Provide lunch at all training 6. Undertake a competitor analysis to identify competitors weaknesses 7. Undertake a customer survey using a questionnaire to determine satisfaction with

services. 8. Evaluate the feasibility of the adoption of a uniform –meet with NMC staff and test idea

with them 9. Develop Commercial visit program – by July 10. Undertake a direct marketing campaign 11. Undertake other marketing initiatives such as advertising and PR campaigns. 12. E-commerce/local provider - re launching 1a Res. products (business to business

solutions)


6.1.2 Evidence of knowledge transfer at the Reporting stage

Using Best practice forum, commitment sheets as a starting point for discussion in the

interviews, the researchers asked all survey respondents the extent to which they had

implemented a practice from another market. The findings are reported in Table 6.2

below and overleaf.

Table 6.2: Extract of findings re transfer of practices between markets

Market Practices Committed to or implemented Where From Extent of implementation/Notes

Argentina Flytour story - thorough approach to winning a new client

Brazil Always try to find out more about customers business. Always try to make a presentation rather than just submitting a written proposal

Argentina SWAT approach/more closer liaison between sales/customer support

Caribbean/Ecuador

Integration objectives outlined in MBO"S - share common responsibility for customer. Mirroring of staff roles/regular meetings

Argentina Half day basic training program - in response to fact that one week courses falling off

Mexico Course taken from Mexico - and significantly enhanced.

Austria Testimonial campaign Switzerland Testimonial campaign about to be launched Chile Web site development - use as tool for

communication with customers Ecuador The monitor site through statistics - which

customers are looking at which pages - adapt approach/ Send out fortnightly newsletters

Ghana Introduce yearly TA event and awards Pakistan Held the award ceremony this year, which was a great success

Ghana Develop & use a questionnaire to determine customers needs

Tunisia Found problems to be addressed with their help desk - and they have now addressed these issues

Israel Conduct an official launch Pakistan Inspired by strong promotional, high profile nature of Pakistani travel awards. Had lazer show - invited OPERA singer. Invited prospects. Have high market growth.

Israel Introduce top travel agents awards Pakistan Due for introduction end 2002. Will be high profile event as per launch - designed to differentiate Amadeus from Sabre/El Al

Israel Identify key decision makers in prospects Ghana/Egypt Adopted as described Israel Have an NMC Open Door Day Ghana Done Israel Provide lunch on training Ghana Adopted - limit put on how much spent for

lunch Israel Introduce commercial visit program Tunisia Sales staff not only have sales objectives but

also productivity per terminal objectives Israel Competitor analysis undertaken Ghana Looking for points of differentiation - achieved

through product offering/tailored training/service offering

Israel Undertake a customer segmentation model Tunisia Segmentation for their market introduced - tailored to their requirements with additional overlay of product complexity

Israel Evaluate introduction of uniforms Ghana Staff rejected the idea - so not progressed withItaly Running Roadshow later on this year SMART/Swiss To be run later in 2002 Malta Tried to do airline events Ukraine Had no success yet - couldn't get the interest

from the airline Mexico SWAT approach/more closer liaison between

sales/customer support Caribbean Is proving to be very effective in market in

winning business and in integrating team. Mexico Strengthen relationship with customer through

ACD upgrade Argentina

Mexico Pro-web - providing more cost effective customer solutions

Caribbean


Morocco Customer Classification model Tunisia Influenced in development of customer segmentation/classification/visitation

Pakistan Conduct the SWAT analysis Ghana Found that the key difference was level of incentives. So they identified key decision makers and incentivised them

Pakistan Ran an airline event Egypt Prompted them to run a special events and to do joint customer calls with airlines/national carriers (1,4,5)

Paraguay Conduct a sales blitz Caribbean Blitz undertaken - kept current customers - grew market slightly. Also accepted invitation from AA to participate in one of their workshops

Peru Reinforce a team work spirit through regular team meetings

Caribbean Model of working influenced by Caribbean strong team planning and management approach

Poland Improve Key Account Management SMART Poland Stay close with airlines Ukraine Poland Customer Newsletter - Bulgaria Have in place a communication process on a

1/4 ly basis include FAQ's. SMART Incentive Scheme UK Delayed due to reorganization. Still has plans

to implement. Switzerland Marketing campaigns - drink can - and contest Austria Venezuela SWAT Caribbean Commercial, technical and training people now

undertaking visits to prospects and customers together

Chile Change image in Marketplace - demonstrate that we are technological leaders

Argentina Results?

South Africa Caribbean blitz - applied in Durban Caribbean Client was going to sign - and 2 other follow - until SAA came in and bullied the client

South Africa Swiss - Newsletter - and other elements of marketing

Swiss Have just started with their customer newsletter - are also taking ideas from the TAP newsletter

Table Table 6.2 shows that at least 33 practices were transferred. Sometimes the practice

was adopted in full, and at other times, just a part of the practice was adapted. In total,

from a review of the actions taken by the different markets, there is clear evidence that

practices from 15 markets moved to 17 markets.

It is of interest to note where the markets which had implemented a practice from another

market, had first heard about the practice. This information would give a clear indication

as to the most effective communication channels. As shown in Table 6.3 overleaf, best

practice forums were the main communication medium.


Table 6.3: How each market first heard about the Best Practice

Market Practice Implemented Where From How heard about practice

Argentina Flytour story - approach to winning a new client Brazil BP forum Argentina SWAT approach Caribbean/Ecua

dor BP forum

Argentina Half day basic training program Mexico Informal contact with NMCAustria Testimonial campaign Switzerland Informal contact with NMCChile Web site development Ecuador BP forum Ghana Introduce TA award event Pakistan BP forum Ghana Develop questionnaire for customers needs Tunisia BP forum Israel Conduct an official launch Pakistan BP forum Israel Introduce top travel agents awards Pakistan BP forum Israel Identify key decision makers in prospects Ghana/Egypt BP forum Israel Have an NMC Open Door Day Ghana BP forum Israel Provide lunch on training Ghana BP forum Israel Introduce commecial visit program Tunisia BP forum Israel Competitor analysis undertaken Ghana BP forum Israel Undertake a customer segmentation model Tunisia BP forum Israel Evaluate introduction of uniforms Ghana BP forum Italy Running Roadshow later on this year SMART/Swiss Informal contact with NMCMalta Tried to do airline events Ukraine BP forum Mexico SWAT approach Caribbean BP forum Mexico Strengthen relationship through ACD upgrade Argentina Informal contact with NMCMéxico Pro-web Caribbean BP forum Morocco Customer Classification model Tunisia Informal contact with NMCPakistan Conduct the SWAT analysis Ghana BP forum Pakistan Ran an airline event Egypt BP forum Paraguay Conduct a sales blitz Caribbean BP forum Peru Reinforce a team work spirit through regular team

meetings Caribbean BP forum

Poland Improve Key Account Management SMART Documentation Poland Stay close with airlines Ukraine BP forum Poland Customer Newsletter - Bulgaria BP forum SMART Incentive Scheme UK BP forum Switzerland Marketing campaigns - drink can - and contest Austria Informal contact with NMCVenezuela SWAT Caribbean BP forum Chile Change image in Marketplace - Argentina BP forum South Africa Caribbean blitz Caribbean Annual Meeting South Africa Swiss - Newsletter Swiss Documentation

While there was some evidence of transfer across all four regions, the most active regions

in terms of adoption of other practices were Latin America and Middle East and Africa.

Those markets where practices from other markets were implemented are summarised in

Table 6.4 overleaf.


Table 6.4: Those markets implementing best practices from other markets

Region Markets where Best Practices were Transferred to

Middle East & Africa Ghana, Israel, Pakistan and South Africa

Latin America Argentina, Chile Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela

Central & Eastern & Southern Europe Malta, Poland

Western Europe Austria, Italy, Scandinavia, Switzerland

It is interesting to observe that the top three markets for implementing practices from other

markets were Ghana, Israel and Argentina. Understanding the reasons why these three

markets were such enthusiastic adopters will be explored in greater detail in Chapters 6

and 7 as it will provide insight into the necessary conditions for effective knowledge

transfer.

Not all transferred practices worked as well in the new market as in the originating

market, although sometimes the practice was taken and significantly improved. Some

summary examples to highlight these points are outlined in the Table 6.5 below.

Table 6.5: Examples of outcomes from transfer of best practices

Market From Market To Original Practice Outcome Category

Caribbean South Africa

Sales Blitz Fully employed. Process worked well but was not successful due to monopolistic position of major competitor

Full implementation No successful outcome to date in terms of new sales

Pakistan Ghana Travel Agency Award Ceremony

Ghana used the event to invite prospects as well as existing customers and won x new accounts

Full implementation. Very successful outcome in terms of sales – Won 6 new accounts from 14 prospects

Tunisia Israel Customer Visitation Model

Took basic model and enhanced it with goals of increasing customer productivity per CRT

Full implementation. Extended the concept so that sales people not only had sales objectives but productivity objectives per terminal.


Table 6.5 shows that South Africa took the Caribbean sales blitz process and implemented

it in their market. While South Africa was pleased with the way they implemented the

initiative, they were unable to achieve any additional sales as a result of this initiative

because of exceedingly tough, monopolistic competition.

Next, Ghana took the Travel Agency Award program practice from Pakistan. They took

many of the ideas on format from Pakistan, but made a significant change to the invitation

list. They used the event not only to reward existing customers, but to attract new

customers. This strategy proved extremely successful with six new customers won as a

result of their participation in the event.

Israel provides another example of one market taking a practice from another market and

significantly improving it. In this case, the improvements were made to the Tunisian

market’s basic customer visitation model. This helped Israel increase both sales and

customer productivity per travel agency – which was a reverse trend to the market

The Ghana example provides clear evidence of a measurable impact on business

performance. With other examples, it is not always easy to isolate and measure the direct

impact of the initiative because there were a number of initiatives all working together to

achieve the same outcome.

Many markets interviewed had practices from other markets still at the planning stage.

Clearly, there is a time lag effect to consider when looking at transfer of practices across

countries. This time lag could be related to the need, to not only customise the practice

but to build internal acceptance for it.

Therefore it is important when looking for indicators or measures, to consider all stages of

the knowledge transfer process. This would involve considering the initial level of

interest shown in another practice, any planning in progress, evaluating what steps were


actually taken and then measuring the impact of these initiatives. These points are

highlighted in Figure 6.1 below.

Figure 6.1: Stages of Knowledge Transfer Process

6.2 Evidence of Change in Attitude

Much has been written about the influence of attitude change on behaviour and vice versa

(Bandura 1986; Festinger 1957; Fishbein & Azjen 1975). Given that these are often the

first steps of a knowledge transfer process, evidence of attitude change is important in the

measurement process. Examples of attitude change could be identified within

interviewees’ comments. An example follows:

‘I found the presentation by Maria on the Caribbean sales blitzes very interesting’

(WE – 3)

The researcher had the distinct impression that this Western European GM was surprised

that they found the practice from the Caribbean and Central American market interesting

because they didn’t expect to learn anything from the Latin American region.

It is important to note here that because of the way the regions are managed, markets in

Western Europe or indeed in any other region, do not receive much exposure to people or

practices from other regions. They therefore tend to develop the closest knowledge of and

relationships with, those markets who they meet with most frequently, which are the

markets within their region. It is therefore possible that the GM’s comment was prompted

purely by previous ignorance.

Interest Shown

Action Taken

Measurable achievement or clearly identified benefit

Time

Action Planned


However, regardless of the interpretation behind the comment what is clear is that there is

an emerging interest in practices from other markets.

6.3 Behaviour Change

A number of events which occurred after the best practice forums gave the researcher

clear evidence that knowledge exchange and transfer was beginning to happen more

organically. These examples included the discovery that some markets were continuing

the conversation on best practices by phone and email within their mutual markets. These

markets were Tunisia and Morocco, and Turkey, Hungary and CIS.

While not a transfer between markets, the researcher was interested to learn that the

Argentinean market had translated some best practices into Spanish to present to the local

team. Additionally they had introduced internal sharing of experiences and projects

between customer service, sales and technical teams and had formally introduced a

suggestion box for capturing ideas on ‘getting better’. These actions will help to build an

internal country culture of sharing knowledge, which may well transfer to other countries,

and will subsequently strengthen the regional knowledge sharing culture.

The researchers noticed that when one market had had their practices documented and

distributed, they had a higher level of curiosity about what other markets were doing. One

positive outcome from the survey was that many markets were keen for their best

practices to be reported in the future. Hopefully as this happens, this will lead to higher

levels of interest in practices from other markets, and subsequently higher levels of

adoption.

Pulling together the findings from this section it is clear that a range of actions, behaviours

and changes in attitude, provide initial evidence that a knowledge sharing culture is being

nurtured at various points in the organization.


Chapter Six has reported the findings from the last of the three research questions. The

final chapter, Chapter Seven will draw together the findings from the study, will discuss

their implications, and will then describe the distinct contribution that the research project

has made to the existing body of literature with regard to knowledge transfer across

countries and cultures.

CHAPTER 7 - Findings and Conclusions 134

CHAPTER 7 - FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

This chapter summarises the findings from the study which were presented in the

previous three chapters and draws conclusions by comparing and contrasting the results

with extant research. Additionally, this chapter identifies the unique contributions and

advances the study has made to an understanding of knowledge transfer in a global

organisational context.

This chapter is organised into six sections: Section 7.1 Overview of Major Findings;

Section 7.2 Contributions of the Study; Section 7.3 Implications for Policy and

Practice; Section 7.4 Methodological Contributions; Section 7.5 Limitations of the

Study; and Section 7.6 Future Research Opportunities.

Some of the outcomes from this study confirm findings in published literature, but they

provide a different lens of analysis by looking at the research issues within the context

of the countries of Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America. Other findings

challenge and advance the existing body of knowledge. Of particular significance are

the findings and recommendations made with regard to the impact of individual

‘resistance’ or filtering factors on knowledge transfer, and in the power of language

used to describe these influencers. The researcher advocates a change both in attitude

and language in this regard, from a deficient industrial perspective to a positive

knowledge perspective, which they believe will have a positive impact on knowledge

transfer within organisational settings. This represents a significant shift from current

thinking with the existing literature describing all barriers to knowledge transfer as

entities to be overcome. Additionally the implications of the recommendation to view

these barriers or filtering factors from a positive perspective will have significant

impact on organisational practices in the knowledge management area.

In summary the other major findings from the research included:

1. The confirmation of the critical importance of face-to-face communication

mechanisms for pushing knowledge transfer to knowledge uptake. While other


mechanisms such as written materials or technology are useful for distributing

knowledge, for more strategic, complex or tacit knowledge, face-to-face

communication is essential. Face-to-face communication is not only more effective

for explaining or demonstrating knowledge, but also for ‘selling’ the value of the

knowledge or practice and for pushing knowledge acquired to knowledge applied.

This is in part related to the importance that individuals place on personally

assessing the status and credibility of the person transmitting the knowledge or

practice.

2. The recognition of the relationship between the broad factors impacting on

knowledge transfer such as organisational factors, external environment and

individual characteristics, in a complex and non-linear manner, suggesting that

knowledge transfer is a multi-factorial process involving interacting variables to an

extent greater than generally accepted hitherto. A simple tool for use within

organisational settings has been developed in this regard.

3. The identification of the interplay between different individual specific

characteristics or factors such as personal experience of change, experience of

working in a different cultural context, ego/personality, and credibility of the person

transmitting the practice which influence the decision to adopt or not adopt a

practice from another market.

4. The discovery that the most prevalent adopters of practices from other countries

had tough market conditions, were very motivated, had previous experience of

introducing change, and had worked in a different cultural context. The mix of

these individual specific and external influencers again highlights the complexity of

factors impacting on and facilitating the knowledge transfer process.

5. The identification of the need for cultural similarity and high levels of

homogeneity, in terms of market maturity, market size and competitive position for

practices to transfer more often between countries.


6. The recognition that many factors operate to influence and shape the knowledge or

indeed to block the transfer of practices between countries, with resistance to other

practices possibly relating to an individual’s need for the application of creativity,

personal ownership and control.

The third research question focussed on indicators of knowledge transfer. While there

was evidence that knowledge transfer had occurred as a result of the best practices

program, the results of the study highlighted the difficulties in effectively measuring

the knowledge transfer process. It is the researcher’s view that clear and visible

measures of knowledge transfer are neither universal nor generic, but rather are to be

discerned in a range of indicators across actions, behaviours, attitudes and outcomes in

culture-specific settings. A time-based knowledge measurement model was developed

to assist in the identification of these indicators.

In summary, the literature review revealed the complex and social nature of knowledge.

This study’s findings highlighted the complexity of factors impacting on ‘the knower’

as a receiver of knowledge and clearly reinforced the importance of face-to-face

communication as the most effective way for ensuring knowledge transfer resulted in

knowledge uptake. Clearly the measurement process for knowledge transfer is not

always visible or straight forward and requires the selection of a range of appropriate,

cultural-specific indicators.

A more detailed explanation of these major findings, together with other observations

and recommendations, follows in Section 7.1.

7.1 Major findings and their relationship to existing theoretical perspectives

This study used an inductive, theory-building research approach to examine issues

related to knowledge transfer across countries and cultures. The nature of the research


questions drove the design of the research methodology, which was described in

Chapter Three.

This section addresses the study’s findings in relation to the three research questions:




A description of the findings follows.

7.1.1 How knowledge is transferred across countries and cultures

The study initially explored the effectiveness of the organisation’s three main

mechanisms for distributing best practices across countries and cultures. These

mechanisms were through documentation, via technology and through face-to-face

channels. What clearly emerged was that while all channels of distribution and

communication were utilised and valued, face-to-face distribution mechanisms were

valued the most highly and had the greatest impact upon effective knowledge transfer.

The importance of social relationships in knowledge transfer emerged as being of

paramount importance and to a large extent, accounts for the popularity of face-to-face

knowledge sharing forums. This could be attributed to the fact that it is easier to

develop a relationship with a person in a face-to-face setting. While people could get

most of the information about a practice via a document, it was clear that they needed

the reassurance of connecting with, and personally assessing the qualities and

credibility of, the person who created the practice. This was an important first step

before making the decision as to whether they would adopt the practice. This point

underlined by a comment by one respondent from a Western European market who said

that they liked the fact that the documents provided contact details. These findings are

consistent with those already reported in the literature by Davenport and Prusak (1998),


Devinney, Soo and Midgeley (2001), Dixon (2000), Festinger (1957) and Wenger,

McDermott and Snyder (2000).

Important learning from the study also emerged in terms of style, and language of

documentation for a community whose first language is not English. It was evident that

translation is important for some markets if the communication and transfer process is

to work well. A similar point was made with regard to the language of communication

at best practice forums. For the Latin American markets it is clear that several markets

would find the forum significantly more effective in Spanish. This is not surprising

given that all markets except Brazil within the Latin American region, communicate

formally and informally in Spanish. For all other regions, the language of

communication between countries would nearly always be English.

Regarding technology, the findings from this study highlight some challenges in using

this modern form of distribution and communication. Firstly, it is not a preferred

communication mechanism for many people with only 25% of respondents looking at

the site on a regular basis. Secondly, the technology needs to be fast, with the users’

being able to quickly identify the information that meets their needs with a minimum

number of key strokes, for it to be effective.

Technology is clearly an enabler of communication and distribution as opposed to a

driver of change, as is evidenced by the fact that most people implemented a practice

after they had contact in person with the owner of the practice, and not from having

read the document on the intranet. This finding is consistent with the work of

Davenport and Prusak (1998), Hackett (2000) and O’Dell and Jackson Grayson (1998).

The web site is however an excellent first port of call, for people interested in practices

from other markets and plays an essential role in raising awareness of other practices in

a geographically dispersed organisation.


7.1.2 Factors that impact on knowledge transfer

Several other themes emerged from an analysis of the findings with regard to the

second research question. Firstly, there are many factors impacting on the effectiveness

of knowledge transfer processes. Clearly, just because knowledge exists, and we have

access to it, and it conforms to our standards of ‘good’ knowledge or ‘proven best

practice’, does not mean that it will automatically influence activities or behaviours.

Many factors operate to limit or pare down the knowledge, and to block the transfer

between countries of knowledge-based practices. At a broad level, these factors relate

to the nature of the knowledge being transferred, the external environment, the

organisation and to the individual. This study’s findings revealed that there was a level

of complexity and non-linear interconnectivity within and between these factors, which

confirms that knowledge transfer is a complex, multifactorial process relying on a

number of interacting variables. This finding builds on the work on Nonaka and

Takeuchi (1995) but provides a more comprehensive framework for considering the

impact of these influencers.

It is useful to analyse these findings by initially considering those factors which relate

both to the nature of the knowledge itself, and to the ‘knower’ or potential recipient of

the new knowledge. One aspect of the nature of knowledge is its relative complexity. In

the study, the nature of knowledge being transferred via the best practices program was

evaluated as being both relatively complex and strategic in nature. It therefore had tacit

as well as explicit elements to it, requiring social contact for knowledge transfer to

occur effectively. Respondents affirmed this point very strongly in the study. This

point reinforces the initial findings of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) about the

importance of social contact for effective knowledge transmission.


7.1.2.1 Factors relating to the individual

There is a matrix of factors influencing an individual’s interest in practices from other

markets. For example, they are directly influenced by: their own experience of change;

their experience of working in a different cultural context; ego/personality; relationship

with and perception of staff in the central organisation; the perception of the credibility

of the person ‘owning’ the best practice; and total life experiences. When individuals

make decisions they reference their previous experience, contextual information,

grounded intuition, and personal values. The point here is that there is an interplay of

different ‘individual specific’ factors influencing the decision to adopt a practice from

another market.

7.1.2.2 Factors relating to the organisation

Another set of factors impacting on knowledge transfer is related to the organisation

itself. The first of these, absorptive capacity, had a clear impact on knowledge transfer

in the study. Universally, it was the smaller, less resource-rich markets that indicated

that additional assistance in terms of people or budget was required to implement new

practices. These markets clearly had a more limited capacity to juggle current priorities

and projects to accommodate new initiatives from elsewhere.

National or country culture was a significant factor impacting on the effectiveness of

the knowledge transfer process. The need for cultural similarity in knowledge transfer

emerged frequently as important. The key issue to consider here is whether or not this

cultural factor or filter is a good or bad influencer. At the heart of the matter may be the

issue of risk. From a positive perspective, General Managers or Sales Directors are

employed to utilise their deep knowledge of the market to make decisions about the

suitability of introducing new practices or initiatives to improve sales performance.

With a higher degree of cultural fit, they may be confident that there is a lower risk,

greater context specificity, less change required and a higher probability of success in

introducing a new process or initiative. From a negative perspective, being highly

ethnocentric may foster a caution or risk aversion that blinds individuals to new

opportunities and ideas from other countries. Thus while culture is a clear factor

impacting on knowledge transfer, it may not be a negative one.


7.1.2.3 Factors related to the External Environment

A number of factors in the external environment also emerged as significant in

impacting on knowledge transfer. These factors include relative competitive

environment and market maturity. The survey respondents clearly indicated that for

practices to transfer between two countries, there needs to be a high level of

homogeneity between them in terms of market maturity, market size and competitive

position. Simply put, the greater the similarities between the two countries the higher

the chance of a successful transfer of practices.

7.1.2.4 Characteristics of most prevalent adopters

An analysis as to why some markets were such prevalent adopters revealed useful

findings with regard to the interplay between external and individual factors. Two

General Managers (GMs) within MEA and one within LA were all prevalent adopters

of practices from other markets. These three countries were in different parts of the

world and were therefore operating in different cultural contexts. They also had

different competitors and different positions of market share. The researcher’s

observations are that all had tough market conditions, in terms of either economic

environment and/or strong competition. These external conditions had forced the NMC

to implement a range of new practices to survive. All had therefore significant

experience of introducing change. At an individual level, each of the three GMs for

these markets were rated by their internal colleagues as being very motivated. Another

note worthy factor related to the ethnic origin of the GM and their personal experience

in operating outside their cultural framework. All three GM’s had had experience in

working in a different country and cultural context. They therefore had personally been

in a position where their cultural assumptions and framework may have been

challenged.

7.1.2.5 Need for Ownership, Control and Personalisation

If the GM’s from these three markets can implement practices from markets with a

different cultural context, market maturity, competitive position and market strength,

then it begs the question that perhaps some of the reasons offered for rejection of a

practice, relate more to another but unstated factor. It is proposed that resistance to


other practices could be related to a need for creativity, personal ownership, and

control.

This idea has emerged following consideration of two factors. Firstly, comments made

by some respondents revealed a level of general resistance to adopting practices from

other markets. Secondly, the literature on what constitutes a good job and motivates

knowledge workers provided a useful theoretical context. The literature in this area

such as Drucker (1998) and Allee (1997) suggests that knowledge workers obtain their

sense of fulfilment from their work through the creation of new ideas, the opportunity

to display initiative and from working autonomously. Clearly a practice adopted from

another person does not involve the same level of creativity and ownership, and is

therefore not valued as highly as an idea which they have developed themselves.

The implications of this hypothesis are that the way knowledge transfer programs are

designed and communicated should be oriented towards allowing for a high level of

customisation and personalisation so that the creative, autonomous and control aspects

of work are still inherent. Leonard (1998, p. 62) describes this personal orientation as

one of signaturisation. In explaining this concept, Leonard highlights the emotional

attachment that people have to their mindsets and to the way they solve problems. This

mindset may have been developed over many years and is one with which they strongly

identify, both personally and professionally. It is likely that in their experience, this

mindset has been a key to their success. The key learning here is that people should not

be denied the opportunity to utilise their signature skills by being asked to adopt

practices from other areas ‘as is’. Rather, they should be encouraged to take a practice

from another area as a seed of an idea or building block only – and then to utilise their

own deep knowledge, experience and problem solving skills to adapt and customise it

to their local circumstances/environment.

7.1.3 Indicators of knowledge transfer

A key finding with regard to research question three was the difficulty in obtaining

clear and visible measures of knowledge transfer. This is because knowledge, and

therefore knowledge transfer, are not always clearly visible ‘objects’. (A model which


describes the visible and invisible elements of knowledge transfer is provided in

Section 7.2.) Additionally, it is not always easy to isolate and measure the direct impact

of the implementation of a practice when there were several practices or initiatives all

working together to achieve the same objectives. However, having said this, the study

was able to identify a range of indicators which when taken together, give a relatively

clear picture as to knowledge transfer effects. The key recommendation emerging here

is to look for a range of indicators across actions, behaviours and attitudes.

The best practice forum process itself provided several useful indicators. These

indicators included a commitment by a participant to try to introduce a practice from

another market. This action was evidence of a positive attitude and disposition towards

practices from outside their market. A second, and perhaps more important indicator

was evidence of actions taken with regard to these commitments and later on, results

achieved or the impact of these actions. A third indicator that could be observed in the

group processes at the forums, was the general level of resistance displayed in

discussions on practices from other markets. This was particularly evident when

markets offered reasons for rejecting a practice for implementation.

A model to capture both attitude and behaviour changes as well as outcomes is

provided in Figure 7.1 below.

Figure 7.1: Stages of Knowledge Transfer Process

A more detailed model is provided in Section 7.2

Interest Shown or resistance

observed

Action Taken

Measurable achievement or clearly identified benefit

Time

Action Planned


7.2 Contributions of the Study

With the major findings from the study summarised in Section 7.1, it is appropriate to

direct attention to comparing these findings with the existing literature in the area.

In Chapter One it was noted that, while the importance of knowledge creation and

knowledge management is widely recognised as vital to an organisation’s ongoing

competitiveness and success (Hackett, 2000; Nonaka 1998; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990;

Sveiby, 1997), there has been limited systematic study of knowledge creation and

transfer in organisations (Devinney, Soo & Midgley, 2001; Dixon, 2000). Much of

what has been reported in the literature is anecdotal in nature. This study has therefore

provided much needed, qualitative research to fill this gap, and has added an interesting

dimension by looking at the issues of knowledge transfer in an organisation operating

across Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America.

The following section is organised with a discussion of contributions to the literature

under each of the three research questions.

7.2.1 Means of knowledge transferred

Many authors have attested to the importance of face-to-face communication and social

interaction in knowledge transfer, particularly for tacit knowledge, as was confirmed in

this study (Alvesson 2001; Festinger 1957; Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Dixon, 2000;

Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Wenger, McDermott & Snyder 2000). This study has clearly

affirmed how important face-to-face communication is for knowledge to be converted

to action. This is consistent with the insight by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), that

knowledge needs social processing.


The growing interest in the literature for communities of practice as a knowledge-

sharing mechanism (Wenger 2002; Mc Dermott & Snyder 2002; Perkmann 2002) was

also supported by this research project with many respondents indicating a desire to

share knowledge in a face-to-face forum with people sharing the same market

characteristics and business challenges. These identified populations can be clearly

recognized as communities of practice.

The use of technology as a communicator or enabler rather than as a driver for change,

was supported by Davenport and Prusak (1998). Hackett (2000) made a similar point

by highlighting the limitations of knowledge management efforts for organisations who

relied too heavily on a technological knowledge distribution strategy.


Several authors have made contributions in this area (Dixon 2000; Hackett 2000;

Prusak & Davenport 1998; Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Ruggles 1998; Szulanski 1996).

Each cite a different order of influence of factors which mediate knowledge transfer.

Additionally, their methodologies indicate that they obtained their research information

from different populations e.g. often U.S. senior management, rather than the

European/Latin American middle to senior management participant population targeted

as a part of this progam. The major exception to this is Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)

whose studies were undertaken in Japan. These realities make it difficult to compare

findings and to generalise in this area. However, with these limitations understood,

some comparative analysis follows.

Davenport and Prusak (1998) and Hofstede (1997) discussed cultural differences

impacting on knowledge transfer, although this factor was not considered in isolation to

individual credibility issues. This point was highlighted in the anecdote of the difficulty

of the transfer of knowledge from tunnellers in New Zealand to Boston (Davenport &

Prusak 1998, p 99). In this circumstance, knowledge transfer was only possible when

the two parties were physically brought together. These findings support this project’s

outcomes regarding the influence of culture on knowledge transfer, and the interplay of


this factor with a range of individual dynamics such as assessment of personal

credibility. This finding was also supported by Andrews (2000).

Dixon (2000, p. 169) asserted that different types of knowledge require different

transfer processes and that the identification of the most effective transfer systems

involves asking the following questions:

• Who is the intended receiver of the knowledge in terms of similarity of task and

context

• How routine and frequent is the task?

• Is the knowledge tacit or explicit?

While Dixon’s model of knowledge transfer does have some relevance because it

considers three factors known to impact on knowledge transfer, it is thus judged

simplistic and limited in application. Specifically, the model fails to consider a range of

important external factors, organisational cultural factors and factors intrinsic to the

individual as has been described previously in this report.

Szulanski (1996) identified a lack of absorptive capacity, a lack of motivation to adopt

the practice, inadequate information, credibility between the source and the recipient,

and causal ambiguity as some of the top reasons why knowledge transfer does not work

well. These findings are very relevant when compared to those within this research

project. For example, in terms of absorptive capacity, it is clear that a lack of human

and financial resources is a barrier to implementing practices for smaller NMCs in the

study.

A lack of motivation to adopt a practice is a finding of interest. From this study it is

clear that being motivated, does not necessarily translate into being motivated to adopt

a practice from another market. Some of the reasons offered for this lack of motivation

including a lack of credibility and causal ambiguity, are supported by this study.

However, the researcher proposes that the resistance to adoption could be more related

to a need for creativity, personal ownership and control, which are factors identified by


Leonard (1998) and which the researcher believes need to be taken into consideration

in the design of organisational programs and systems to foster knowledge transfer.

At this juncture it is relevant to share an observation about the language used within

existing literature with regard to the many factors impacting on knowledge transfer.

For example, much of the literature describes ‘barriers to knowledge transfer’ or

‘resistance’ to ideas and practices from other areas. It is the researcher’s view that the

predominantly negatively-framed language within the literature, and possibly in use

within organisations, could create resistance or counter productive responses to

knowledge transfer efforts. As has already been mentioned, organisations employ

Managers to utilise their experience and deep knowledge of their local environment and

market to make decisions with regard to new initiatives. It would not be desirable for

them to pursue every new idea or initiative which comes along or to override their

judgement based on years of experience as to what would be an effective new practice.

Accordingly any individual resistance to adopting a practice from another market

should be viewed from a positive filtering perspective and not from a negative one.

Further comment on this point is provided in Section 7.3.

Another significant finding from the study was that the most prevalent adopters of

practices from other markets had tough market conditions, were very motivated, had

significant experience of introducing change and had life experience in a different

cultural context. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) have already identified the impact that

external conditions of fluctuation, crisis and chaos have as positive drivers for change.

This finding is also given support by the literature on change management (Dunphy

1982) Existing literature with regard to what are the factors for a successful

expatriation experience also support this study’s findings with regard to experience of

change and of working in a different cultural context (Karpin 1995; Davidson &

Kinzel 1995).

Taking all the findings together, it is the researcher’s opinion that there is a relationship

between the broad factors impacting on knowledge transfer such as organisational

factors, external environment and individual characteristics, in a complex and non-

linear manner, suggesting that knowledge transfer is a multifactorial process involving

interacting variables to an extent greater than generally accepted hitherto.


7.2.3 Indicators of Knowledge Transfer

’The controllers are completely obsessed with financial indicators. We are trying to

convince them that knowledge is increasingly important as an indicator of success, but it

will be enormously difficult for us to put a value on something that cannot be measured

by the standards of financial control.’ (Company Director in a diversified multinational

concern). (Probst, Raub & Romhardt, 2000)

As mentioned in Section 7.1.3, a key finding from the study was the difficulty of

obtaining clear and visible measures of knowledge transfer. Thinking about these

difficulties has led to the development of a simple ‘iceberg’ model, which highlights

the often invisible nature of knowledge.

Figure 7.2: Model of observable and non observable knowledge

.

In the model above, the visible and non-visible elements of knowledge are represented.

From the model, knowledge can be observed through words, behaviours and actions.

What cannot be observed are attitudes, intuition, values, emotions and ideas that are

under development or have yet to be communicated through words or actions. This

model illustrates that it isn’t always possible to observe the adoption of new

knowledge. This is because there is often a time lag or gestation period for knowledge

to convert to action. This gestation period can be influenced by a range of factors

including pride, fear of taking a risk, a lack of absorptive capacity, lack of sufficient

Behaviours/Actions Words

VISIBLE

NOT VISIBLE Attitudes

Ideas under development

Values Emotions Knowledge

Intuition


knowledge about the credibility of the source, or a need to customise and personalise

the knowledge and therefore to make it one’s own (Davenport & Prusak 1998, Leonard

1998). Kanouse and Jacoby (1988) make a telling point about the slow transfer of

knowledge from the non-visible to the visible in their comment ‘there are good reasons

to believe that behaviour change is a much rarer event than the acquisition of

knowledge.’

Within the existing literature, most models of knowledge measurement are related to

measuring an organisation’s total knowledge assets as opposed to the impact of

knowledge transfer. Models developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992) and Edvinsson

and Malone (1997) provide good examples in these areas. While not a model or

measurement tool, many anecdotes of the impact of knowledge transfer abound in the

literature with some firms such as BT attempting to measure the impact of knowledge

management systems on efficiency improvement and user satisfaction. (Stanley 2001).

The difficulty of finding useful measures for knowledge transfer is well reported

(Perkmann 2002; Probst, Raub & Romhardt 2000, p. 249; Wiig 1996). Probst, Raub

and Romhardt (2000, p. 246) comment that the evaluation of knowledge assets is

hampered by the extreme difficulty of assigning cause to effect and assert that

knowledge can only be recorded indirectly.

The literature indicates that it is difficult and limiting to consider quantitative measures,

which while easy to collect, i.e such intranet statistics, are not accurately indicative of

knowledge transfer. Perkmann (2002) recommends a case study approach, such as that

used in the present study, as a more useful way to measure the impact of knowledge

transfer while Probst, Raub and Romhardt (2000) believe that an approach that seeks to

understand causal relationships and to look for indirect measures such as indicators is

more appropriate.

The outcomes from this study taken together with findings from the literature, have

highlighted the importance of considering a range of actions, behaviours, attitudes and

results as indicators of knowledge transfer over a period of time. Some definitions of

these terms follow. An action is simply a conscious step or decision taken to achieve an

outcome. A behaviour is a way of acting or being, generally observable, but the term


may be used to refer to imputed mental events. An attitude is a predisposition to feel,

think and act in a certain way, in relation to an object or set of objects. Behaviours and

attitudes are closely linked as an attitude can be evident in behaviour and behavioural

patterns sometimes reflect certain attitudes. An outcome is simply the result of an

action. These indicators are outlined in Table 7.1 below.

Table 7.1: Indicators and measures of knowledge transfer over time

Short Term (3-6 months) Medium Term (6-12) months Long Term (1-3) years

• Usage of intranet increases (actions)

• Interest shown in markets to implement practices from other markets in discussions (attitudes and behaviours)

• Number and complexity of commitments made to implement a practice from another market (actions)

• Evidence of the adoption and adaptation of practices between markets (outcomes)

• Evidence of the nurturing of an informal knowledge sharing culture between countries (actions and behaviours)

• Increased sales (outcomes)

• Increased customer retention (outcomes)

• Evidence that markets are getting quicker at introducing change (actions)

On this basis, it is proposed that both of these models of knowledge and knowledge

transfer advance the body of knowledge in this area by highlighting the invisible nature

of knowledge and knowledge transfer, while at the same time providing some tangible

visible indicators of knowledge transfer through a comprehensive framework capturing

actions, attitudes, behaviours and outcomes/impacts. Typical examples of the

indicators at the case study site are provided in the model to assist other practitioners.

7.2.4 Summary of Findings & Theoretical Context

This section summarises the findings and major contributions that have been previously

described. A summary of all findings related to each research question and their

theoretical context is provided in Table 7.2 below.


Table 7.2: Summary of major contributions

Ref Description of Finding Ref R. Question

Confirmation, advancement or challenge

Theoretical reference

1 Face-to-face knowledge transfer mechanisms, such as best practice forums, were the most preferred and most effective for knowledge transfer.

1 Confirms existing findings Alvesson (2000). Davenport and Prusak (1998) Devinney, Soo and Midgley (2001);Dixon (2000); Festinger (1957); Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2000)

2 Technology needs to be fast, easy to access and easy to use to be effective – but is just an enabler of communication and distribution, and not a driver for change

1 Confirms existing findings Davenport and Prusak (1998); Hackett (2000); O’Dell & Jackson Grayson (1998)

3 Knowledge transfer in any format is less effective when communication occurs through a participant’s second language

1 & 2 Confirms existing findings Davenport & Prusak (1998)

4 People like social interaction in knowledge transfer because they can assess the credibility of the source

2 Confirms existing findings Andrews (2000), Davenport and Prusak (1998); Leonard (1998); Szulanksi (1996)

5 Many factors operate to influence and shape, or indeed to block the transfer of practices

2 Confirms existing findings Davenport and Prusak (1998); Hackett (2000); Szulanski (1996)

6 There is a relationship between the broad factors impacting on knowledge transfer such as organisational factors, external environment and individual characteristics, in a complex and non-linear manner

2 Advances existing findings Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)

7 There is an interplay between different individual specific characteristics or factors influencing the decision to adopt a practice from another market

2 Advances existing research Gamble (2001)

8 Absorptive capacity has a clear impact on knowledge transfer

2 Confirms existing findings Szulanski (1996);Hackett (2000); Davenport and Prusak (1998)

9 The need for cultural similarity in knowledge transfer emerged as important

2 Confirms existing findings Hofstede (1997); Davenport and Prusak (1998)

10 For practices to transfer between two countries, there needs to be a

2 Confirms existing findings Dixon (2000);


Ref Description of Finding Ref R. Question

Confirmation, advancement or challenge

Theoretical reference

high level of homogeneity between them in terms of market maturity, market size and competitive position

Gagne (1997)

11 The most prevalent adopters of practices from other markets had tough market conditions, were very motivated, had work experience in a different cultural context and had significant experience of introducing change

2 Confirms existing findings Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995); Davidson and Kinzel (1995)

12 Resistance to other practices could be related to a need for creativity, personal ownership, and control.

2 Advances existing research E.I.U (1998); Leonard (1998)

13 Clear and visible measures of knowledge transfer are not universal or even generic, but rather are discerned in a range of indicators across actions, behaviours and attitudes

3 Confirms existing findings Perkmann (2000); Probst, Raub & Romhardt (2000)

14 A change in language relating to individual filtering factors from a negative to positive perspective should contribute to the breaking down of barriers to knowledge transfer

2 Advances existing findings

7.3 Implications for Policy & Practice

Several significant findings have emerged from this study. This section converts some

of these findings into a usable tool, model or advice for knowledge management

practitioners. There are four recommendations made in this regard.

The first two recommendations for policy and practice relate to the probability that a

Manager will adopt a practice from another market. As was reported previously, it

was evident from the study’s findings that the most prevalent adopters of practices from

other markets had tough market conditions, were very motivated, had significant

experience of introducing change and had life experiences in a different cultural

context. These findings have been used to develop:


1. A tool for assessing the probability that a Manager will be open to adopting a

practice from another market; and to provide

2. Advice regarding strategies and criteria for selecting and developing Managers

with openness to practices from outside their cultural context.

An explanation of these recommendations is provided in Section 7.3.1 and Section

7.3.2

7.3.1. A Tool for Assessing Managers openness to knowledge transfer

Pulling together the findings from the study, it is possible to develop a tool for

assessing the likelihood that a manager will adopt a practice from another market,

environment and culture. This tool is presented in Table 7.3.

Table 7.3: Tool to assist measure the likelihood a manager will consider a practice

Characteristic 1 2 3 4 5 Score

External Factors

Volatility of Market

Competitive environment


Strength of push factors

Support for absorption capacity

Existence of face-to-face mechanisms

for facilitating uptake of knowledge

Individual Factors

Motivation

Experience of other cultures

Experience of introducing change

TOTAL

Rating

General Applicability

Intra-country specific

Intra-country specific


Using a score of 5 as the highest rating and 1 as the lowest, a rating can be made for a

Manager against each of the characteristics. These individual scores will highlight

problem or deficient areas. The scores for a number of Managers can also be totalled

showing which individuals will be more likely to adopt a practice from another market.

Where low scores on certain factors flag areas requiring attention, appropriate

organisational interventions and experiences can be designed to improve this situation.

For example, if the organisation lacks sufficient face-to-face sharing opportunities for

groups of staff for whom knowledge transfer is important, then these opportunities need

to be created. The same principal applies for absorptive capacity, and so on.

Lines have been drawn on the tool to identify those factors which have general

applicability to knowledge transfer situations, with those factors more directly related

to knowledge transfer across countries and cultures specifically identified. Guidelines

on how to use the outcomes from the tool with regard to the selection and development

of managers are provided below.

7.3.2. Strategies for Selecting and Developing Managers

To encourage a higher transfer of knowledge and practices across countries, it is

important to recruit and then develop managers with this objective in mind. The tool

described above creates a ‘map’ that may assist in this regard. From a recruitment

perspective, questions relating to a candidate’s experience of working in a different

cultural context, volatile environments and in driving change, would all provide useful

indicators of their interest in knowledge adoption from outside their own cultural

context. From a development perspective, should this type of experience be lacking in

current and potential managers, appropriate development opportunities can be created

by way of new roles, job swaps, short term targeted assignments and action learning

projects.

7.3.3 Model of Influencing Factors and Indicators

The study’s findings revealed the large number, complexity and interconnectivity of

factors impacting on knowledge transfer. Reflecting on these findings, it is useful to


think of the challenge of achieving knowledge transfer across countries and cultures, as

a journey. The knowledge is carried on this journey by an individual who is influenced

by a range of external and organisational factors, as well as having been influenced as a

carrier of knowledge, by their own life experiences. Their life experiences can be

positive or negative as reflected by the various hills and valleys on the journey. As the

journey continues, the knowledge is altered, pared down, added to and customised. As

knowledge is converted into action, there are a number of indicators that this transfer

has occurred. This journey, and the indicators of knowledge transfer are depicted in

Figure 7.3 .

Figure 7.3: Model of Knowledge Transfer Across Countries and Cultures

Short Term (3-6 months) Medium Term (6-12) months Long Term (1-3) years

• Usage of intranet increases (actions)

• Interest shown in markets to implement practices from other markets in discussions (attitude and behaviours)

• Number and complexity of commitments made to implement a practice from another market (actions)

• Evidence of the adoption and adaptation of practices between markets (results achieved)

• Evidence of the nurturing of an informal knowledge sharing culture between countries (actions and behaviours)

• Increased sales (outcomes)

• Increased customer retention (outcomes)

• Evidence that markets are getting quicker at introducing change (actions )

Individual factors

Organisational factors

External factors

Influencers

Indicator Categories Behaviours Attitudes Actions Taken

Start

Results Achieved

Journey

Indicators Detailed


7.3.4 Organisational attitude, language and process development

A further recommendation with regard to organisational language and policy stems

from previous comments relating to the use of negatively-framed language, within the

existing literature. It is likely there are several related negative consequences of this

situation. Firstly, as language reflects attitude, any communication about the value of

knowledge transfer will perhaps unconsciously reflect the attitude of bias towards

individual filtering factors. This could then in turn lead to further resistance and less

transfer of knowledge. Secondly, the researcher strongly believes that if individual

filters are valued and respected, and staff are encouraged not to adopt a practice from

another market but to examine the basics, and then adapt and customise it then there

will be higher levels of knowledge transfer.

As indicated in Table 7.4, current language usage in the literature describes barriers to

knowledge transfer very much from a deficient perspective. Examples of this language

from Szulanski (1996) include ‘lack of motivation, inadequate information and lack of

absorptive capacity’. This language very much reflects an industrial perspective of

organisations. The researcher advocates a change in attitude and language in this

regard. It is reasonable to assert that a change, firstly in attitude towards these filtering

factors, followed by a change in language, will positively impact on the design of

organisational policy and programs created to encourage knowledge transfer.

Table 7.4: Comparison of language used for knowledge transfer

Industrial Perspective Knowledge Perspective

Old View Language New View Language

Barriers/Resistance Lack of absorptive capacity Lack of motivation to adopt the practice Inadequate information

Importance of context specificity

Positive filtering based on deep experience and judgement


7.4 Methodological Contributions

The study demonstrates the value to be gained from the application of more than one

method of data collection from the same set of subjects. By using a combined approach

of observation and structured interviews, the methodology allows a more useful

interpretation of the data as if in a triangulation design.

7.5 Limitations of the Study

The representative nature of the survey group, together with the broad data collection

methods employed, were key strengths of the study approach. However, the researcher

perceived a key limitation of the survey group to be the lack of participation by two of

the largest and most mature markets. These markets were Spain and France. Staff from

these organisations have had a limited involvement in the best practice transfer

program, and appear not to be positively disposed towards the adoption of practices

from other markets. Investigating the reasons why would have been of significant

interest.

The limitations of case study research and the steps taken to ensure the quality of all

processes used were outlined previously in Section 3.6. In terms of the measures of

quality related to research outcomes as defined by Eisenhardt (1989), it can be asserted

that good theory, new insights, and areas for future research emerged at the end of the

study, and not at the beginning. These new areas are outlined in Section 7.6 Future

Research opportunities.


7.6 Future Research Opportunities

Several areas emerged during the analysis of the findings and from the existing

literature, which the researcher believes, are worthy of further investigation. These

areas relate both to the impact of various individual and organisational factors on

knowledge transfer. Firstly, those areas relating to individual factors include cultural

characteristics, motivation, personality, adult learning styles and generational factors.

A brief description of each of these areas is provided below.

Culture clearly emerged as a major influencer on knowledge transfer in the study. A

relevant area of further investigation would involve examination of the impact of

specific behaviours and attitudes typically associated with each culture on the other.

Interesting questions to be explored in this area include the extent to which some

cultural characteristics have a higher openness to considering practices from other

markets.

Motivation is another area worthy of further research. In the findings it was reported

that motivation does have an impact on knowledge transfer. However, there is not

necessarily a linear relationship in this regard, with some people being motivated in

their jobs, but not necessarily motivated to adopt a practice from another market. It is

likely that further research is necessary to clarify this point.

A related and curious factor concerns the impact of personality on knowledge transfer

which was alluded to but not discussed in any depth in this report. In the findings it was

reported that there was some evidence of a level of tension between the central

organisation and the local marketing companies. The researcher has already proposed

that this could be attributed to a GM’s desire for ownership, control and personal

creativity. Another potential area worthy of further study could be the impact of ego

and or personality on knowledge transfer.

Again, reflecting on the reasons behind the level of tension between the central

organisation and the NMCs, it might be wondered whether the existence of a generation


gap between the two groups has an impact on knowledge transfer. The researcher’s

own knowledge of the organisation indicates that staff in the central organisation are

generally aged 25 to 40, with General Managers generally being aged 40 to 65. The

question emerges as to whether this generational gap has an impact on knowledge

transfer.

Another area of investigation worthy of attention concerns the manner in which adults

learn, especially with regard to culture. A deeper understanding of different adult

learning styles, may provide useful input into the design of formal knowledge transfer

processes

The second general area suggested for further investigation relates to organisational

culture. This could be quite a broad area covering factors related to, for example, levels

of trust, openness, how people work together and tolerance for mistakes. As a part of

this study it would be important to consider the impact of leadership and more

specifically the impact of leadership style on openness and trust.

7.7 Closing Observations

This study has strongly affirmed existing findings within the literature with regard to

the critical importance of face-to-face interaction in knowledge transfer. It is clear that

while other distribution channels such as technology and written material play a role in

making knowledge available, it is the social interaction that provides the catalyst for

transferring knowledge i.e., moving knowledge from a passive state to action. This is

because face-to-face communication provides so much more than words or information

alone. Through voice, gestures and body language the receiver is able to assess the

credibility of the source and to develop their innate sense of the reliability and

credibility of the sender. This is an important first step in the knowledge transfer

process. It is eminently clear that the decision to take a practice from another market is

not made in an emotionally neutral state and that this factor must be taken into

consideration in the design of organisational knowledge management systems and

processes.


The existing literature points to a broad range of factors impacting on knowledge

transfer. This theory building research project has developed a model and tool, which

pulls these factors together into a cohesive form, and highlights the complex and non-

linear interconnectedness between them.

Additionally, the study has observed limitations in the existing literature in terms of the

language used for discussing barriers or resistance to knowledge transfer. It is

suggested that the language currently used in the literature is influenced by an attitude

that sees factors limiting knowledge transfer from a negative perspective. This attitude

implies a resistance to knowledge transfer, as something to be overcome or defeated.

Such an attitude is likely to impact negatively on the words and actions of people trying

to drive change processes, and may also have the effect of creating further resistance. A

clear alternative is to respect the personal filtering and decision making processes that

all Managers possess – and to encourage them to take the seeds of the ideas within the

practice and to tailor it to reflect their unique market circumstances.

The study has also laid the groundwork for future research which can only assist in

building our understanding, of the complex issues which impact on knowledge transfer

across countries and culture.

LIST OF APPENDICES 161

LIST OF APPENDICES

1 Disciplinary Clusters in Organisational Learning (Andrews 2000)

2 Initial letter to respondents

3 Survey Questionnaire

4 List of Markets and Persons Participating in Survey

5 Justification for research questions

6 Markets excluded from survey and those not responding

7 Knowledge Management Process at case study site

8 Example of a Best Practice Snapshot

9 Interview Plan

10 Personal Log

APPENDIX 1 162

APPENDIX 1

DISCIPLINARY CLUSTERS IN ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING

Adapted from Easterby-Smith (1997) – cited in Andrews (2000)

halla


APPENDIX II - LETTER TO GENERAL MANAGERS 163

APPENDIX II - LETTER TO GENERAL MANAGERS

Dear Cornel, (Personalised letters) RE: Your feedback on Best Practice Sharing Process This is just a short note to let you know that we will be calling you in the next two weeks to arrange a time to have a ten minute chat with you in order to obtain your feedback on the sales best practice program. As you are probably aware, over the last two years we have been using a number of processes to identify, share and push for the implementation of best practices in sales throughout EMEA LA. Some of these initiatives have included Best Practice Forums and use of the NMC Sales Best Practices Exchange in OPERA to publish best practice paper. We now think it is a good time to assess our learning from the program and get your ideas on the most effective way that the program should be developed in the future - to ensure that it gives you value. We are still committed to finding, documenting, sharing and pushing for the adoption of best practices in sales wherever we can find them. And we are also keen to learn more about any barriers you experience in learning about, and then implementing best practices from other markets. We also need your feedback on OPERA as a mechanism for sharing best practices and on the best practice documentation that was distributed at the GM meeting in April. Whew - well so much for my short note. That is probably enough for the moment. Either Mary or myself will be in touch shortly by phone. Cheers Tracy

APPENDIX III – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 164

APPENDIX III – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Region 2. NMC 3. Person Called: 4. Position: 5. Number of people in their sales organisation 6. Number of people in their marketing organisation Date: Time: Interviewer: Background notes on experience of best practice forums and accessing the NMC Sales Business page in OPERA - use in context of introduction Notes from Discussion with PMM/MM 7. Attitude of GM to Change ?

Very Motivated (VM) Motivated (M) Not Motivated (NM)

Who should I call in the NMC as a part of this survey ? 8, 9, 10, 11. What do they perceive to be the top two priorities in this market in the sales and marketing area? (This will depend upon their current market positioning). For example, market share increase, customer retention etc


Based on our discussions with PMM/MM - what Best practice papers might be most relevant for their markets needs? Summary of Organisations Objectives of Survey - For reference. First objective - Increase awareness of best practices from other NMC's & KM program Second objective - Follow logic of sales process from Awareness, Interest, Desire and Action Ref Objectives

1 MEASURING the extent of, and impact of best practice implementation. Identifying where changes and improvements have been made. (also level of interest in best practices from other markets.) Including where possible the impact on sales)

2 Identify BARRIERS to implementation 2.1 Motivation to change 2.2 Language 2.3 Absorptive capacity - i.e. other priorities/lack of time, lack of resources, lack of

expertise 2.4 Culture 2.5 Lack of Knowledge about best practice

3 Access to OPERA - as an effective distribution and communication of BP's 3.1 Evaluating their experience of, and interest in accessing OPERA to find best

practices in sales 3.2 Identifying barriers to accessing OPERA 3.3 Identify and promote interest in and value of monthly Newsletter 3.4 What other ways should we communicate

4 BEST PRACTICE PAPERS THEMSELVES 4.1 Identify how they found out about best practices? I.e. Distribution to paper at GM

meeting, BP forums, via the web etc 4.2 Obtain feedback on best practice papers - how do they perceive them. Are they well

structured, easy to read to facilitate implementation. Identify support needed to implement best practices

4.3 Obtain feedback on format of BP forums in future - and other BP initiatives

5 PUSH FOR MORE IMPLEMENTATION. Use the survey process itself to promote other best practices - thereby continuing the push for the adoption of best practices.

6 IDENTIFY OTHER BEST PRACTICES in the NMCs.

This survey will be a success if we:

Able to obtain specific, valid feedback as to the real extent of implementation Obtain honest specific feedback as to the usefulness of the best practice forums, OPERA

and best practice toolkits as mechanisms for identifying, sharing and distributing learning Identify key ways to take BP and KM program forward


PART 1 - AWARENESS PHASE of Elements of Sales Focus Program 1. Can I just check - Did you receive copies of the Sales Focus Program

Package including: a. Best Practice Snapshots ? b. Best Practice Detailed papers ? c. Sales Executive Toolbox ? d. Sales Manager Toolbox ? Which were distributed at the EMEA LA GM meeting in Nice in April? (ref 4.1) (If no ask if they would like for us to send them a toolkit pack and move to part 2 - question 22). 2. Were they distributed within your organization? Do you need any

additional paper copies ? (Not sure that this question is correctly positioned - will need to renumber at end). (Old number 21)

3. Did you have the opportunity to: a. Read the Sales Executive Toolbox Yes/No b. Read the Sales Manager Toolbox Yes/No 4. Did you implement or plan to implement any tools from the salesforce

toolboxes? (Yes/No) 5. If yes - Which ones? For more information, do not hesitate to contact - [email protected] OK - I now want to look at the best practice papers. 6. Did you have the opportunity to: a. Read the BP Snapshots ? Yes/No b. Read detailed papers Yes/No c. If no, was there anything that we could have done to entice you to read them? If yes to either of the questions above then ask the following questions


7. What was your overall impression of the documents in terms of content and presentation. For example - Did you -

a. Format easy to read? Yes/No b. Find the content useful Yes/No c. Enough detail to facilitate implementation Yes/No d. Other ? e. What would you suggest to improve the documents? 8. Were there any practices that you were particularly interested in? If so,

which ones? Why ? (ref 1) Note Market and practice 9. Were there any practices that you were particularly interested in? If so,

which ones? Why ? (ref 1) Note Market and practice What additional support could we provide to help you to implement this practice in your market? (ref 2.3) 10. People or budgetary resources to implement practice? Y/N 11. More info - via contact with other NMC' s who have already implemented the

practice. Y/N 12. Anything else ? 13. Are there any other areas sales, marketing or other areas where you would

like to see best practices reported?


Part 2 - Interest PHASE - including accessing OPERA - 14. How often do you access OPERA? Weekly, Monthly, Occasionally, Never?

(ref 3.1) (If never, move to 19 - and ask in a general sense). 15. Do you find it easy to access? (ref 3.2) - Y/N 16. (I'm guessing that) you have managed to receive a digital certificate ? Y/N 17. For you, is the OPERA intranet an effective way to communicate best

practices? (ref 3.1& 3.2) - Y/N 18. In your opinion - how could it be improved ? Newsletter Question 19. Do you receive the monthly - What's New Newsletter which outlines what is

new within the NMC Sales page in OPERA? 20. If Yes, do you like the format, - if no go to next question 21. If no, can I add you to the list for the monthly ? (ref 3.3) New Service for the Future 22. We are considering a number of other services for the future? Could you give

me your opinion as to whether you think they will be valued by NMC"s. a. On-line chat groups/creation of communities around problems to be solved (ONL) b. Provision of more sales tools and guidelines etc(TOL) c. Best practices from external organisations (EXT) d. Others?


Part 3 General Communication and Sharing Processes 23. Generally, how do you hear about best practices from other NMC's

How did you hear about other NMC's best practices?

How would you like to hear about best practices in the future?

• EMEA LA GM meeting • From discussions with staff

in other NMC's • Knowledge Manager

describing Practice • From a PMM or MM • From someone else in your

organization • Best Practice Forums • NMC Exchange in OPERA • Monthly Newsletter • Other ?

24. What are you preferred ways to learn about other markets most effective

practices? (refer to table above). Best Practices in Your NMC 25. Do you think that your NMC has some proven/effective practices in the sales

and marketing area that other NMC's could benefit from learning about ? Who should I speak to, to learn more about this practice.


Part 4 - Desire & Action Phase - Implementation of Best Practices Instructions for interviewer - Make link here to respondents previous responses to questions about best practice interest and implementation. Refer to best practice implementation sheet before proceeding with these questions. If they have not been to a best practice forum - then skip questions - 35 - 39 and turn page. For example, I understand that at the x best practice forum, y displayed an interest in implementing z best practice. (Wait to receive confirmation from the respondent) 26. Could you now provide me with details on the extent to which a best practice

that you had heard about from another market influenced you in the implementation of another similar practice in your market?

27. Which practice

28 Which market from

29 Extent of implementation

30 Results/Impact - Sales or customer retention

31. Any enhancements made - Any other learning

E.g. competitor SWOT -

Ghana

About Best Practice Forums specifically Preamble - In the past we have used best practice forums as a key mechanism for identifying, sharing and encouraging the adoption of best practices in sales. In the past, best practice forums were run by region and were generally attended by GMs or Sales Directors.


We are currently evaluating whether we should continue with this format and would value your feedback: 32. From which other markets are you most interested in exchanging experiences

with? 33. Should we run them in the future by: a. By region - in the same format that we have used in the past - Y/N b. By markets in a similar competitive position c. With similar problems to solve d. By job level e. Other ideas

APPENDIX IV - LIST OF MARKETS AND PARTICIPANTS 172

APPENDIX IV - LIST OF MARKETS AND PARTICIPANTS

Ref NMC Ref Interviewee Role Interviewed

1 Argentina 1 Stanley Sales Director

2 Austria 2 Stanley Sales & Marketing Director

3 BENELUX 3a Stanley Director Sales & Business Development

BENELUX 3b Stanley GM

BENELUX 3c Stanley Account Director, Director Sales

4 Brazil 4 Stanley Sales Director

5 Caribbean 5 Stanley GM

6 CIS 6 Stanley GM

7 CWA 7 Lovelock GM

8 Ecuador 8 Stanley GM

9 Egypt 9 Stanley GM

10 Finland 10 Lovelock Sales Manager

11 Ghana 11 Lovelock GM

12 Greece 12 Stanley GM

13 Israel 13 Stanley GM

14 Italy 14 Stanley Sales Director

15 Malta 15 Lovelock GM

16 Morocco 16 Stanley Sales Director

17 Pakistan 17 Lovelock GM, Deputy GM and Training manager.

18 Paraguay 18 Lovelock GM

19 Peru 19 Lovelock GM

20 Poland 20 Lovelock Deputy GM

21 SMART 21 Stanley Sales Dir-Norway

22 South Africa 22 Stanley GM, Sales Director

23 START 23 Stanley Strategy

24 Tunisia 24 Stanley Sales Director

25 Turkey 25 Stanley GM/Sales Dir

26 UK 26 Stanley Sales Director

27 Ukraine 27 Stanley GM & Sales Director

28 Zimbabwe 28 Lovelock GM

APPENDIX V – JUSTIFICATION OF THE QUESTION CONTEXT 173

APPENDIX V – JUSTIFICATION OF THE QUESTION CONTEXT

List here questions – themes and intentions of the questions

Ref Question Research Question/s Justification

1 Region Demographic

2 NMC Demographic

3 Personal Called Identifier info

4 Position Identifier info

5 No of people in sales organisation

Contextual info Useful when considering issues of absorptive capacity

6 No of people in marketing organisation

Contextual info Useful when considering issues of absorptive capacity

Attitude of GM to Change

Very Motivated (VM) Motivated (M) Not Motivated (NM)

What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures?

Third party asked – not an appropriate question to ask respondent directly. Question asked of staff in central organisation

What do they perceive to be the top two priorities in this market in the sales and marketing area?

Important contextual background information. Could demonstrate that I was informed. Better position researcher for probing

6 Did you have the opportunity to: c. Read the Toolboxes d. Read the BP

snapshots ? e. Read the detailed

papers ?

Checking that they had been received and read before I asked further question

7 What was your overall impression of the documents in terms of content and presentation. For example - Did you - e. Format easy to read? f. Find the content

useful g. Enough detail to

facilitate implementation

h. Other ? i. Improvements for

documents

4. By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures?

5. What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures?

Nice safe place to start – with easy questions

These question relate to a separate interview process


Ref Question Research Question/s Justification

8 Were there any practices that you were particularly interested in? If so, which ones? Why ?

What are the indicators of knowledge transfer across countries and cultures? By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures? What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures?

Hofstede (1997), Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars (1993). Dixon (2000) referring to Buckman laboratories

10, 11 & 12

What additional support could we provide to help you to implement this practice in your market? People or budgetary resources to implement practice? More info - via contact with other NMC' s who have already implemented the practice. Anything else ?


Barriers: Szulanski (1996), (O’Dell & Jackson Grayson (1998), Dixon (2000), Hacket (2000) Prusak & Davenport (1998), Perkmann (2002), Andrews (2000)

15 & 16

Intranet as communication mechanism How often do you access OPERA? Weekly, Monthly, Occasionally, Never? (ref 3.1) Do you find it easy to access ? - Y/N For you, is the OPERA intranet an effective way to communicate best practices? - Y/N In your opinion - how could it be improved ?

What are the indicators of knowledge transfer across countries and cultures? By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures? What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures?

19, 20 & 21

Email Newsletter Do you receive the monthly - What's New Newsletter which outlines what is new within the NMC Sales page in OPERA?

By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures? What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures?


Ref Question Research Question/s Justification If Yes, do you like the format, - if no go to next question If no, can I add you to the list for the monthly ? (ref 3.3)

22 New Service for the Future We are considering a number of other services for the future? Could you give me your opinion as to whether you think they will be valued by NMC"s. On-line chat groups/creation of communities around problems to be solved Provision of more sales tools and guidelines etc Best practices from external organisations Others?

By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures?

23 How did you hear about other NMC's best practices ? • EMEA LA GM

meeting • From discussions

with staff in other NMC's

• Knowledge Manager describing Practice

• From a PMM or MM • From someone else in

your organization • Best Practice Forums • NMC Exchange in

OPERA • Monthly Newsletter



Ref Question Research Question/s Justification Other ?

24 How would you like to hear about best practices in the future ? Or What are you preferred ways to learn about other markets most effective practices?


26,27,28,29,30,31

Could you now provide me with details on the extent to which a best practice that you had heard about from another market influenced you in the implementation of another similar practice in your market?

What are the indicators of knowledge transfer across countries and cultures?

32 From which other markets are you most interested in exchanging experiences with?


Should we run forums in the future by: • By region - in the

same format that we have used in the past

• By markets in a similar competitive position

• With similar problems to solve

• By job level • Other ideas

What factors impact on knowledge transfer countries and cultures? By what means is knowledge transferred countries and cultures?

APPENDIX VI – MARKETS EXCLUDED FROM SURVEY 177

APPENDIX VI – MARKETS EXCLUDED FROM SURVEY

Markets requested not to contact by PMM or MM: MEA CESE

Gulf States Saudi Arabia, QATAR Sudan

Bulgaria Hungary

Due to the following reasons: Too new- recent market entry Other pressing priorities Current HR issues

Markets contacted for an interview but not responding to request to be part of the survey MEA CESE WE LA Mauritius

Romania Russia Slovenia Czech Republic Croatia

France Spain Iceland Yugoslavia

Venezuela

APPENDIX VII – KM PROCESS AT CASE STUDY SITE 178

APPENDIX VII – KM PROCESS AT CASE STUDY SITE

STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 STAGE 5

Identification Documentation Sharing & Distribution

Pushing for implementation

Measuring impact

HOW By WHO HOW HOW HOW

• Best Practice Forums

• Open invitation to share BPs

• Knowledge Manager

• GMs and Sales Managers

• Other NMC staff

• Intranet

• Email

• BP forums

• CD

• KM sharing practices

• Other central staff sharing practices



• Measuring financial results

• In depth survey

Knowledge Management Process

APPENDIX VIII – EXAMPLE OF BEST PRACTICE SNAPSHOT 179

APPENDIX VIII – EXAMPLE OF BEST PRACTICE SNAPSHOT

SMART: EFFECTIVE GEOGRAPHICAL COVERAGE OF MARKET THROUGH A ROADSHOW

OBJECTIVES • Raise the profile of SMART & Swedish Railways on the market • Launch new products (e.g. Rail product) / Sell existing products • Provide product training and useful tips and hints • Meet with customers in an 'interesting' environment in order to further strengthen the

relationship and build customer loyalty and • Arrange additional customer visits while in the area.

Market Context

• Large geographic market with customers spread across

• Market share shrinking as a result of direct distribution

• Market potential bookings: 45 Mio (SMART incl. Sweden)

DO’s

• Use a partner if possible to share costs and maximize impact

• Segment customers for workshops design & attendancy

• Communicate extensively - Internally/ externally

• Follow-up on invitations • Train and brief generals

thoroughly • Keep event to twice a year

but increase the number of customer visits

• Measure & monitor results

You can FIND MORE DETAILS on this best practice: On the Sales & Marketing Best Practices CD - with lots of other great sales and marketing practices In the NMC Sales Best Practices Exchange in OPERA under Put Strategy into Action - Run an effective Marketing Campaign

WHAT WAS ACHIEVED!!

• Tremendous visibility of the the SMART brand - with the event attracting the attention of 45 journalists

• Sold 35 Value Pricers and 5 SMART itineraries

• Met with over 800 customers and prospects in a 3-week period

• Customer event rated at 4.2

MA

RK

ETIN

G

/

C

UST

OM

ER E

VEN

T

THE CHALLENGE

With travel agencies dispersed across Sweden, SMART had to find the most efficient and cost effective way to visit and provide support to as many of their customers as possible, while raising the profile of SMART, meeting prospects and selling additional products.

NMC Facts • Market share: 80% • Staff: 220

Christina Karlegran Marketing & Communication Manager

Practice Support tools

• ‘Memories’ brochure handed out to all participants • Visuals in the paper showing how the train was setup.

SUMMARY There is a lot that can be learnt about running a high impact marketing and sales event like a travelling roadshow as SMART has done for the last few years. The Roadshow for 2000 was particularly special as SMART, together with Swedish Railways, organized a combined ‘railshow-roadshow' targeted at travel agencies throughout Sweden. The characteristics of their winning approach included an analysis and segmentation of client needs and interests’ detailed planning, communication and follow-up.

This paper outlines how SMART did it, including: what they achieved; and details of their learning from the experience.

THE APPROACH

• Define objectives for event • Plan in detail, towns to be visited, format for the event • Communicate these plans: both externally and internally(via invitations, meetings etc) • Use customer segmentation to tailor workshops directing customers/prospects according to

their profile & interests • Train staff to be Generals during the show (explained in more detail in the paper) • Carry out the roadshow (workshops from 9h- 21h each day for 3 weeks) • Give out momentos of the event (photos in practice) • Collect feedback from participants – evaluate.

APPENDIX IX – INTERVIEW PLAN 180

APPENDIX IX – INTERVIEW PLAN

To ensure that each interview facilitated the gathering of a richness of information

relevant to the research questions, an interview plan was prepared. This section

outlines what this plan or guide contained, along with the research justification for its

use.

According to King (1995) and Minichiello et al (1991) an interview guide lists the

topics which should be covered during the course of the interview. It should be

developed with consideration for the research literature and from the researchers own

knowledge. This latter point was particularly relevant for this study as the researcher

knew the organisation and knowledge management program intimately, and generally

knew the survey participant and their market well. Additionally, the researcher

undertook pre-interview research into the market and into the General Manager’s

attitude and experience of change.

The overriding philosophy guiding the structure of questions in the interview, was to

prompt interest in practices from another market. To achieve this, it was recognised

that the questioning process needed to follow the AIDA sales approach (Amadeus Sales

Training Documentation, 2002). The acronym AIDA stands for Awareness, Interest,

Desire and Action. This approach means that the researcher must

1. Raise Awareness (of the practice)

2. Prompt the market’s Interest in it

3. Generate a Desire to implement the practice

4. Facilitate the occurrence of Action

An outline of the interview protocol follows.


Introduction to Interview

Thank you for making the time available to speak with me. I appreciate that you are very busy. As you may be aware, I am responsible for facilitating the identification, sharing and pushing for the adoption of best practices in sales and marketing between the NMCs. Our team, (the Strategic Projects team) is dedicated to exchanging knowledge in the sales area between NMC's. Our objective is to support the NMC's to improve sales and marketing, by supporting the introduction of best practices. As I mentioned in our email, we are currently undertaking a telephone survey to evaluate the effectiveness of our knowledge sharing efforts. Particularly in areas including: The best practice toolkits, the best practice forums and the NMC Sales business page in OPERA. We are also looking for new ways to improve the program for next year. Now we understand from our background research, that key sales/marketing issues in your markets are: (State understanding of key issues – Prompt for confirmation) Is that correct? Are there any other key sales and marketing issues in your market? I'd like to start by obtaining your feedback on the Best Practice toolkits and program -

'How to do its' and 'Snapshots?

With the context for the interview clearly explained, the researcher then moves through

each of the blocks of questions. The first block is concerned with obtaining feedback

on the best practice documentation. For each of the question sets, it was important to

first validate that the respondent was familiar with the subject being discussed such as

the documentation, best practice forum or the intranet site before moving on to the

detailed questions.

There were eight key blocks of questions. These blocks were questions related to

obtaining feedback on:

• Best Practice documentation

• Best Practice Intranet


• Best Practice Monthly email newsletter

• Seeking input on Other mechanisms for sharing knowledge

• How they heard about best practices/How they like to hear about best practices

• Probing their markets best practices

• Obtaining evidence of knowledge transfer & creation

• Best Practice forums

Barriers to implementation were identified through responses in each question block.

(A full copy of the interview questionnaire is provided in Appendix III with the

justifications for questions being provided in Appendix V)

Throughout the interview, the researcher would restate what they had hear the

respondent say not only to demonstrate that they were listening, but to check that they

had understood the meaning correctly. Throughout the interview new items or

perspectives often emerged. When this occurred the researcher capitalised on the

opportunity which presented in terms of ‘flexible and opportunistic data collection that

allow additions to questions during interviews during the series of interviews’

(Easterby-Smith 1994, p. 532; Easterby-Smith, Thorpe & Lowe 1991).

Closing the Interview

Once all questions had been asked and responded to, the interview was wrapped up in

the following way:

Thank you so much for your time. In terms of follow-up from our discussion I will now Add your name to the monthly newsletter list (Anything else)

In terms of the survey outcomes - Once we analyze the results - and then have made decisions as to what we will do with the program as a result of what we have learned - we will communicate with you via the WHAT's New newsletter.

APPENDIX X – PERSONAL LOG 183

APPENDIX X – PERSONAL LOG

A personal log was used as a part of the structured interview process. This section

outlines what the literature says about the value of a personal log, and describes how

this tool was used to enhance the quality of data capture and analysis in this study.

During all telephone interviews extensive notes were taken. On the day of the

interview, all hand written notes on the answer collection sheet were transcribed into

two documents. One document was an excel spreadsheet that captured answers to

closed questions, and allowed a short synopsis of open questions, the other a word

document called a Personal Log. To ensure that none of the richness of the dialogue

was lost, the personal log captured not only direct quotes from participants, but the

researchers observations and feelings about the respondents answers to the questions.

This approach has received endorsement from noted experts on Qualitative

methodology including Minichello. Minichello et al (1991) identified three main

criteria for writing an effective personal log. These criteria were that the researcher:

• Writes all thoughts and impressions in the log;

• The personal log should be frank, and there is no predetermined length; and

• The notes must give a full account of the people, the situations and the decisions

made during the interview

As can be seen from the above statements, the researchers actions conformed to the

recommendation of Minichello.

In terms of the practicalities of the logs, each entry commenced with the date of the

interview, the name of the person being interviewed and their role. Careful attention

was paid to capturing the interviewees’ exact words and to noting their level of interest

and involvement in the best practice sharing program.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 184

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adelman, C., Jenkins D. & Kemmis, S., 1983, Rethinking the case study: Notes from

the Second Cambridge Conference. Case Study: An Overview, Deakin University

Press. vol.1, pp. 1-10.

Allee, V. 1997, The Knowledge Evolution: Expanding Organizational Intelligence,

Butterworth Heinemann, Boston. Massachusetts.

Algonquin college of Applied Arts and Technology, 1996, Learning on the Internet.

URL <http://www.algonquinc.on.ca/edtech/gened/styles.html>

Alvesson, M. 2001, ‘Knowledge work: Ambiguity, image and identify’, Human

Relations, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 863 - 886.

Andrews, K. M. & Delahaye, B. D. 2000, ‘Influences on knowledge processes in

organizational learning: The psychosocial filter’, Journal of Management Studies, vol.

37: 6, pp. 797 – 810.

Andrews, K. M. 2000, Knowing, Learning and Unlearning in a Knowledge Creating

Company: An inductive, theory building case study. Unpublished PhD thesis, QUT,

Brisbane.

Argote, L& Ingram, P. 2000, ‘Knowledge Transfer: A basis for competitive

advantage in firms’, Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol.

82, pp 150 - 169

Argote, L 1999, Organisational learning: Creating, Retaining and Transfering

Knowledge, Kluwer Adademic Publishers. Boston Inc

Argyris, C. & Schon, D. A.1995, Organizational Learning, Theory, Method and

Practice, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.

Ausinfo, 1994, Style Manual For Authors, Editors and Printers, Commonwealth of

Australia, Canberra.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 185

Bandura, A 1986, Social Foundations of thought and action. Prentice-Hall.

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

Bar-On, R. 2000, The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Development,

assessment, and Application at Home, School and in the Workplace. Jossey Bass, San

Francisco.

Bass, B. M. 1997, ‘Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm

transcend organizational and national boundaries?’ American Psychologist, vol. 52,

no. 2, pp. 130 - 139

Bateson, G. 1973, Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Paladin, London.

Beard, C. & Easingwood, C. 1989, Improving Grounded Theory: Methods and

Methodology, Working Paper, Manchester Business School. Manchester UK.

Bell, J. 1993, Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in

education and social science, Second Edition. Milton Keynes Open University Press

Blackler, F. 1995, Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: An overview and

interpretation’, Organization Science, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1021–1046.

Bonoma, T. 1985, ‘Case research in marketing: Opportunities, problems, and a

process’, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 12, pp. 199-208.

Brewer, J. & Hunter, A. 1989, Multi-method research: A Synthesis of Styles, Sage

Publications, Newbury Park, California.

Bridges, W. 1996, Managing Transitions, Nicholas Brearley, London.

Brown, J. & Duguid, P. 1998, ‘Organizing knowledge’, California Management

Review, Spring, pp. 90–111.

Cabrera, A. 2001, Making Sharing Good for all, Url <www.Ft.com>

Cavana, R.Y., Delahaye, B.L. & Sekaran, U. 2001, Applied business research. John

Wiley and Co. Melbourne.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 186

Cortada, J. W. & Woods, J.W. 1999, The Knowledge Management Yearbook. 1999–

2000, Butterworth Heinemann, Boston, Massachusetts.

Craig Smith, N., 1991, ‘The Case Study: A vital yet misunderstood research method

for management’, The Handbook of Management Research, Routledge, London.

Darwin, C. 1839, Journal of Researchers.

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W. & Beers, M. C. 1997, ‘Successful knowledge

management projects’. In Cortada, J. W. & Woods, J.W. 1999, The Knowledge

Management Yearbook. 1999–2000, Butterworth Heinemann, Boston, Massachusetts.

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W. & Beers, M. C. 1998, ‘Successful knowledge

management projects’, Sloan Management Review, vol. 39, pp. 43-57.

Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. 1998, Working Knowledge – How Organisations

Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

Davidson, P. 2002 ‘Management Development in the Royal Australian Navy’ in

proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management and

International Federation of Scholarly Associations of Management Annual

Conference, Gold Coast, Australia July 10 - 13

Davidson, P. & Griffin R. W. 2000, Management: Australia in a Global Context.

John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane.

Davidson, P. & Griffin, R. W. 2003, Management: An Australasian Perspective, 2nd

edn, John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane.

Davidson, P. & Kinzel, E. 1995, ’Supporting the expatriate: A survey of Australian

companies’, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources Management, vol. 33, no. 3,

pp. 105-116.

Davis, D. & Cosenza, R. M. 1995, Business Research for Decision Making,

Wadsworth Publishing Co, Belmont, California.

Deal, T. & Kennedy, A. 1982, Corporate Culture, Addison Wesley, Reading

Massachusetts.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 187

Delahaye, B. 2002, The Management of Knowledge – A Systems Theory Approach for

Vocational Education and Training, QUT, Brisbane.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) 1998, The Landscape of Qualitative Research:

Theories and Issues, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.

Deshpande, R. 1983, ‘“Paradigms lost”: On theory and method in research in

marketing’, Journal of Marketing, vol. 47, pp. 101-110.

Devinney, T., Soo, C. W. & Midgley D. F. 2001, ‘Show me the money’, Knowledge

Management Asia Pacific, July/August, pp. 1-7.

Dibella, A. & Nevis, E. 1998, How Organizations Learn: An Integrated Strategy for

Building Learning Capability, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Dick, B. 1990, Rigour Without Numbers, Queensland Interchange, Chapel Hill,

Queensland.

Dixon, N. 2000, Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They

Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

Drucker, P. F. 1991, ’The new productivity challenge’, Harvard Business Review, vol.

69, no. 6, pp. 69-79.

Drucker, P. F. 1993, Post-capitalist society, Harper Business, New York.

Drucker, P. F. 1998, ‘The coming of the new organization’, Harvard Business Review

on Knowledge Management, HBR Publishing, Boston Massachusetts.

Dunphy, D. C. 1982, Organisational Change by Choice, McGraw-Hill, Sydney.

Earl, M. J. 1997, ‘Knowledge as strategy: Reflections on Skandia International and

Shorko Films’, in Knowledge in Organisations, Resources for a Knowledge Based

Economy ed L. Prusak, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, pp. 1-15.

Easterby-Smith, M. 1994, Evaluating Management Development, Training, and

Education, Gower, Aldershot, England.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 188

Easterby-Smith, M. 1997, ‘Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and

critiques’, Human Relations, vol. 50, no. 9, pp. 1085 – 1113.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. & Lowe, A. 1991, Management Research: An

Introduction, Sage Publications, London.

Eccles, J. S. 2002. ‘Motivational beliefs, values and goals,’ Annual Review of

Psychology, vol. 53, Feb. pp. 109-132

Economic Intelligence Unit with Andersen Consulting, 1998, Knowledge Workers

Revealed: New Challenges for Asia, EIU.

Edvinsson, L. & Malone, M.S. 1997, Intellectual Capital Realising your company’s

true value by finding its hidden brainpower, Harper Business, New York.

Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989, ‘Building theories from case study research’, Academy of

Management Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532 – 550.

Emory, C. W. & Cooper, D. R. 1991, Business Research Methods, Irwin, Boston.

Evans, W. A., Hau, K. C. & Sculli, D. 1989, ‘A cross-cultural comparison of

managerial styles’ Journal of Managerial Development, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 5-13.

Festinger, L. 1957, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Row Petersen, Evanston,

Illinois.

Fiol, C. M. & Lyles, M. A. 1985, ‘Organizational learning’, Academy of Management

Review, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 803 – 813.

Fishbein, M & Azjen, I 1975, Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An

Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison Wesley Publishing, Reading,

Massachusetts.

Fontana A & Frey J, 1998, Interviewing the art of science in collecting and

interpreting qualitative materials, (Denzin N.. & Lincoln Y eds) Sage Publications –

Thousand Oaks. CA

Gagne, R. M. 1997, The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction, Holt,

BIBLIOGRAPHY 189

Rinehart and Winston, Austin, Texas.

Gamble, P. R. & Blackwell J. 2001, Knowledge Management. A State of the Art

Guide, Kogan Page Limited, London.

Ghauri, P.N., Gronhaug, K & Kristianslund, I 1995. Research Methods in Business

Studies: A practical guide, London. Prentice Hall

Goleman, D. 1998, Working with Emotional Intelligence, Bloomsbury. London.

Gilchrist, V. J. 1992, ‘Key informant interviews’, in Doing Qualitative Research, eds

B. F. Crabtree, & W. L. Miller, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California, pp. 70-

89.

Graves, C. 1970, Levels of Human Existence, transcription by W. R. Lee. Includes a

reprint of the ‘Levels of existence: An open systems theory of values’, Journal of

Humanistic Psychology, Fall 1970, Vol. 10. No. 2, pp. 131-154.

Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. 1994, ‘Competing paradigms in qualitative research’,

Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London.

Gummesson, E. 1991, Qualitative Methods in Management Research, Sage

Publications, Newbury Park, California.

Hackett, B. 2000, Beyond Knowledge Management: New Ways to Work and Learn,

The Conference Board, Research Report 1262-00-RR.

Hampden_Turner, C. & Trompenaars, F. 1993, The Seven Cultures of Capitalism,

Double Day, New York.

Handy, C. 1996, Beyond Certainty: The Changing Worlds of Organisations, Harvard

Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N. & Tierney, T. 2000. What’s Your Strategy for Managing

Knowledge? Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, Massachusetts. (This is an

enhanced edition of the HBR article 99206, originally published in March/April

1999.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY 190

Healey, M.J. & Rawlinson, M.B. 1994, ‘Interviewing techniques in business and

management research’ in Wass, V.J. and Wells, P.E., Principles and Practices in

Business and Management Research, Aldershot, Dartmouth

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.1959 The Motivation to Work. Wiley.

New York.

Hofstede, G. 1997, Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind, McGraw Hill,

New York.

Housel, T. & Bell, A. 2001, Measuring and Managing Knowledge, McGraw Hill,

New York.

Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. 1992, ‘The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive

Performance’, Harvard Business Review, Jan/Feb, 70(1) 71-79.

Kanouse, D. & Jacoby, I. 1988, ‘When does information change the practitioner’s

behavior?’ International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, vol. 4,

no 1, pp. 27-33.

Karpin, D. et al 1995, Report of the Industry Taskforce on Leadership & Management

AGPS Canberra.

Kelly, C 2000, David Kolb, The Theory of Experiential Learning and ESL

<http://iteslj.org/Articles/Kelly-Experiential>

Kotter, J. P. 1995, ‘Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail’, Harvard

Business Review, March-April, pp.59-67.

Kvale, S. 1983, The qualitative research interview: A phenomenological and a

hermeneutical mode of understanding, Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, vol.

14, pp. 171- 196.

Lee, T. W. 1999, Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Sage

Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.

Lei, D., Slocum J. W. & Pitts, R. A.,. 1999, Designing Organisations for Competitive

Advantage: The Power of Unlearning and Learning Organisational Dynamics, AMA

BIBLIOGRAPHY 191

27 (3): PP 24-38.

Leonard, D. 1998, Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the sources of

innovation, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Liebowitz, J. 1999, Knowledge Management Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton,

Florida.

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. 1985, Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage Publications, Newbury

Park, California.

McGregor, cited in Chiffre, J-D, & Teboul, J., (1990) La Motivation et Ses Nouveaux

Outils, Des Cles pour dynamiser une equipe. ESF. Paris

Maslow, A.H. 1943, ‘A theory of human motivation’, Psychological Review, vol. 50,

pp. 370–396.

Mehrabian, A. 1968, ‘Inference of attitude from the posture, orientation, and distance

of a communicator’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, vol. 32, pp. 296-

308.

Meridian Resources Associates. 1977 Training/Management Consulting Firm. Table

originally referenced on Project Management Training Course run internally at

Amadeus 2001. Meridian Organisation contacted and indicated that table developed

internally in 1977, URL: www.meridianglobal.com

Mertins, K., Heisig, P. & Vorbeck, J. 2001, Knowledge Management: Best Practices

in Europe, Springer, Heidelberg.

Miles, G., Miles, R.E., Perrone, V. & Edvinnson, L. 1998, ‘Some conceptual and

research barriers to the utilization of knowledge’, California Management Review,

Spring, pp. 281 – 288.

Miller, W. L. & Crabtree, B. F. 1992, ‘Primary care research: A multimethod

typology and qualitative road map’, in Doing Qualitative Research, eds B. F.

Crabtree, & W. L. Miller, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California, pp. 3-28.

Minichello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E. & Alexander, L. 1992, In-depth Interviewing:

BIBLIOGRAPHY 192

Researching People, Longman Cheshire, Melbourne.

Mishler, E.G. 1991 Research Interviewing: Context & Narrative, Harvard University

Press. Cambridge. MA

Mishlove, D. 1988, Thinking Allowed. Conversation on the Leading Edge of

Knowledge and Discovery. Thinking Allowed Productions. An interview with

Frances Vaughan URL: <http://www.williamjames.com/transcripts/vaughan2.htm>

Nadler, D.A. & Tushman, M.L. 1990, ‘Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and

organizational change’, California Management Review, Winter.

Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. 1998, ‘Social capital, intellectual capital and the

organizational advantage’, Academy of Management Review, 23 (2), 242 – 266.

Nair G.S. & Reige A.M. 1995 Using convergent interviewing to develop the research

problem of a postgraduate thesis. Marketing Educators and Research International

Conference. Griffith University. Gold Coast. Australia.

Nankervis, A.R., Compton, R. L. & McCarthy, T. E. 1994, Strategic Human Resource

Management. Thomas Nelson Australia.

Neuman, W. L. 1994, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches, 2nd edn, Allyn and Bacon, Sydney.

Nonaka I. & Takeuchi, H. 1995, The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford

University Press, USA.

North, K., Probst, G. & Romhardt, K.1998, Wissen Messen: Ansatze Erfahrunger und

Kritsche Fragen, Zfo 3/98: pp. 158–166.

O’Dell, C. & Jackson Grayson, C. 1998, If Only We Knew What we Know: The

Transfer of Internal Knowledge and Best Practices. The Free Press, New York.

O’Dell, C. & Jackson Grayson, C. 2001, Identifying and Transferring Internal Best

Practices. Examining the business case for sharing best practices and the cultural

organisational factors that help or hinder the process.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 193

Ways and Means White Paper – Issue – August 2001.

URL: www.knowledgeboard.com

Oppenheim, A.N., 1992, Questionnaire design, Interviewing and Attitude

Measurement, 2nd edition . Pinter Publishing. London

Patton, M. Q. 1990, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage Publications,

Newbury Park, California.

Perkmann, M. 2002, Measuring Knowledge Value. KIN brief No 7, 26/07/02

<http://www.ki-network.org>

Perry, C. 2002, A Structured Approach to Presenting Theses: Notes for students and

their Supervisors. QUT. <[email protected]>

Perry, C. & Coote, L. 1994, Process of a case study research methodology: Tool for

management development?’ Paper presented at Annual conference of Australian and

New Zealand Academy of Management, Wellington. New Zealand.

Peters, T. 1988, Thriving on Chaos, Alfred A. Knopf, New York

Peters, T. & Waterman, R.H. 1995, In Search of Excellence. Lessons from America’s

Best Run companies. Harper Row, New York.

Pfeffer, J, 1982, Organizations and organizational theory. Marshfield, MA, Pitman

Polanyi, M. 1958, Personal Knowledge, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Polanyi, M. 1966, The Tacit Dimension, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

Porter, M. E. 1980, Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York.

Prahalad, C. & Gamel, G. 1990, ‘The core competence of the corporation’, Harvard

Business Review, May-June: pp. 79-91.

Probst, G., Raub, S., & Romhardt, K. 2000, Managing Knowledge, Building Blocks

for Success, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Prokesch, S. E. 2000, ‘Unleashing the power of learning: An interview by British

BIBLIOGRAPHY 194

Petroleum’s John Browne’, Harvard Business Review on Point Enhanced Edition,

(Originally published in 1997 - HBR article 97507 )

Prusak, L. 1999, Where did Knowledge Management Come From?. URL:

<http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/404/prusak.html>

Prusak, L. 1998, - What’s up with Knowledge Management: A Personal View -

Article in Cortada J. W. & Woods J.W. (1999) The Knowledge Management

Yearbook. 1999 – 2000 Butterworth Heinemann, New York.

Punzo, R. 1977, ‘Communicating across technology model : Source: Globally

Speaking: Skillls and Strategies for Success with Asia, Video Two, (Meridian

Resources Associates, Inc. San Francisco

Romhardt, K. 1998, Die Organisation aus wissensorientierter Perspektive –

Moglichkeiten und Grenzen von Intervention id die organisatorische Wissenbasis.

Dissertation, Univerity of Geneva. Wiesbaden, Gabler

Ruggles, R. 1998, ‘The State of the Notion: Knowledge management in practice’,

California Management Review, vol 40, no. 3, pp. 300-306.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P & Thornhill, A. 1999, Research Methods for Business

Students, Financial Times Prentice Hall, London.

Schein, E. 1985, Organisational Culture and Leadership, Jossey Bass, London.

Schein, E. 2000, Spotlight on Edgar Schein. Record of an interview with Emerald

Now’, March, <http://pippo.emeraldinsight.com>

Seidman, I 1998. Interviewing as qualitative research: a guide for researchers in

education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press

Senge, P. 1990, The Fifth Discipline: The Age and Practice of the Learning

Organization, Century Business, London.

Shannon, C. & Weaver, W. 1998, The Mathematical Theory of Communication,

University of Illinois Press, Evanston, Illinois.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 195

Sowa, J., Ellis, G, Levinson, R. & Rich, W. 1995, ‘Conceptual structures,

applications, implementation, and theory’, Third International Conference on

Conceptual Structures, ICCS, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.

Spender, J. C. & Grant, R. M. 1996, ‘Knowledge and the firm: Overview’, Strategic

Management Journal, vol. 17, Winter Special Issue), pp. 5–9.

Stace, D. 1997, Reaching Out from Down Under: Building Competence for Global

Markets, McGraw Hill , Sydney.

Stake, R. 1983 The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks Sage Publications

Stalk, G., Evans, P. & Schulman, L. 1992, ‘Competing on capabilities ‘, Harvard

Business Review, March-April, pp. 57-69.

Stanley, T. 2001, Personal Communications with Lucent Technologies.

Stanley, T. 2001, Notes and PowerPoint Presentation from Strategic Intranet Course

run by IFQ in Brussels – reference info on BT intranet strategy.

Stewart, T. 2002, The Wealth of Knowledge: Intellectual Capital and the Twenty

First Century Organisation, Nicholas Brearly Publishing Ltd, London.

Sveiby, K.E. 1997, The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring

Knowledge-based Assets, Berret Koehler Inc, San Francisco.

Szulanski, G. 2000, ‘The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of

stickiness’. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol 82, pp 9 -

27

Szulanski, G. 1996, ‘Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best

practices within the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 17 Winter Special Issue,

pp. 27-43.

Teece, D. J. 1998, ‘Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy,

markets for know-how, and intangible assets’, California Management Review,

Spring, pp. 55– 79.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 196

Torraco, R. 1997, ‘Theory-building research methods’, in eds Swanson, R. A. & E. F.

Holton, Human Resource development Research Handbook: Linking Research and

Practice, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco.

Trompenaars, F. 1993, Riding the Waves of Culture, Nicholas Brearley Publishing

Limited, London.

Ulrich, D. & Lake, D. 1990, Organizational Capability, John Wiley & Sons, New

York.

Van der Spek, R. & Spojkervet, A. 1997, Knowledge Management: Dealing

intelligently with Knowledge: Knowledge Management and its integrative elements,

in eds initials Liebowitz & initials Wilcox, CRC Press, Boco Ratan , Fla

Vaughan, F. 1998, Thinking Allowed: Conversations on the Leading Edge of

Knowledge and Discovery. Thinking Allowed Productions. An interview with

Frances Vaughan URL: <http://www.williamjames.com/transcripts/vaughan2.htm>

von Krogh, G. & Roos, J. & Klein, D. 1998, Knowing in Firms – Understanding,

Managing and Measuring Knowledge. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.

von Krogh, G, Ichijo, K & Nonaka, I. 2000, Enabling Knowledge Creation: How to

Unlock the Mystery and Release the Power of Innovation, Oxford University Press.

Oxford.

Vroom, V. H. & Jago, A. G. 1988, The New Leadership, Prentice-Hall, Englewood

Cliffs, N.J.

Vroom, V. H. 1964, Work and Motivation, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Wah, L. 1999, ‘Knowledge Management – Behind the Buzz (Mr Feature Story)’,

April, URL <http://www.wahansa.com/louisa/portfolio/km_behindthebuzz.html>

Wah, L. 1999, ‘Making knowledge stick’, Management Review, American

Management Association International. New York.

Weick, K. E. 1991, ‘The non-traditional quality of organizational learning’,

BIBLIOGRAPHY 197

Organization Science, vol. 2,no. 1, pp. 116-124.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. & Snyder, W. 2002, Cultivating Communities of Practice,

Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Wenger, E & Snyder, W 2000‚ ‘Communities of practice: The organizational

frontier’, Harvard Business Review, volume 78, no. 1, pp. 139-146.

Wheatley, M. 2001, ‘The real work of knowledge management’, IHRM Journal,

April-June, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 29-33.

Wilber, K (2001) A Theory of Everything. An integral vision for Business, Politics,

Science and Spirituality, Gateway Publishing, Winnipeg.

Wiig, K. 1993, Knowledge Management Foundation, Schema Press, Texas.

Woolf, H. ed, 1988, Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language,

Prentice-Hall Trade. New York.

Yin, R. K. 1994, Case study research: Design and methods , 2nd edn, Sage

Publications, London.

Zikmund, W. G. 1997, Business Research Methods, The Dryden Press, Orlando,

Florida.

Zima, J. P. 1991, Interviewing: Key to effective management, Macmillian Publishing

Company, Singapore.

Motivational Processes – Expectancy Theory – author unidentified URL

<http://www.cba.uri.edu/Scholl/Notes/Motivation_Expectancy.html>

knowledge transfer across countries and cultures an ... · knowledge transfer across countries and...

Documents